I can't even figure out how to execute the simple perf test class. IntelliJ gives me some annotation processing error, and doing it from the command line is turning into a classpath nightmare to figure out what jars are needed to execute the test manually.
On 1 March 2016 at 11:34, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Before the talk: Hi, I'm Remko, I help on Apache Log4j, are you available > after the preso to talk about some issue we are seeing? > > Gary > On Mar 1, 2016 8:29 AM, "Matt Sicker" <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm attending a JUG meetup tonight with Kirk Pepperdine presenting. It's >> supposed to be a Java performance workshop type of thing, so if you've got >> a decent way to ask about it, I could see if he can help figure out this >> regression. I can at least show off the SimplePerfTest and any >> microbenchmarks we have. >> >> On 28 February 2016 at 11:54, Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Take a look at the git bisect command. Might help you find which changes >>> caused the problem. >>> >>> >>> On Sunday, 28 February 2016, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Thank you for digging in Remko. This is will be a nice theme to >>>> publicize when you get it figured out. >>>> >>>> Gary >>>> On Feb 28, 2016 4:08 AM, "Remko Popma" <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> After removing the potential impact of appenders and layouts by >>>>> testing with log4j-core\src\test\resources\perf-CountingNoOpAppender.xml >>>>> and org.apache.logging.log4j.core.async.perftest.SimplePerfTest, I've >>>>> confirmed my initial numbers: >>>>> >>>>> 2.0: 7.5M ops/sec >>>>> 2.1: 6M ops/sec >>>>> 2.2: 6M ops/sec >>>>> 2.3: 6M ops/sec >>>>> 2.4: 4.5M ops/sec >>>>> 2.5: 4M ops/sec >>>>> 2.6: 2M ops/sec >>>>> >>>>> I tried reverting various changes made to AsyncLogger since 2.0, >>>>> performance improves a little up to 4M ops/sec. >>>>> However, when completely reverting AsyncLogger source to the 2.0 >>>>> version, performance is back to 7.5M ops/sec. >>>>> >>>>> I'll try starting from the 2.0 source and getting back to 2.6 >>>>> functionality without losing performance... >>>>> (Lengthy process...) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Feb 27, 2016 at 12:18 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> This is the PerfTestDriver test class (in log4j-core/test, package >>>>>> ...async.perf). >>>>>> Mainly perf3PlainNoLocation.xml: >>>>>> RollingRandomAccessFileAppender, PatternLayout, all loggers are >>>>>> AsyncLoggers, logging a simple string without parameters. >>>>>> >>>>>> Profiling with YourKit did not tell me anything useful. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm now eliminating the effect of Layouts/Appenders, using >>>>>> CountingNoOpAppender, and seeing similar numbers. So this seems to be >>>>>> mostly an issue in AsyncLogger. >>>>>> >>>>>> I'll let you know when I find out more. >>>>>> There's a lot of trial and error here, so this may take a while... >>>>>> >>>>>> Remko >>>>>> >>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>> >>>>>> On 2016/02/26, at 21:02, Mikael Ståldal <mikael.stal...@magine.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Which components (appenders, layouts) are involved in the tests? >>>>>> Would it be possible to do some profiling to see if there is any >>>>>> particular >>>>>> component which is to blame? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 12:51 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> To give you some rough impression on concrete numbers for this trend >>>>>>> : >>>>>>> 2.0: ~6M ops/sec >>>>>>> 2.1-2.2: ~5M ops/sec >>>>>>> 2.3-2.4: ~3-4M ops/sec >>>>>>> 2.5: ~3M ops/sec >>>>>>> 2.6: ~2M ops/sec >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday, 26 February 2016, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> You're absolutely right. I still have quite a few unit tests to >>>>>>>> add. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Initial perf testing shows a downward trend in Async Logger >>>>>>>> performance with every release. (Logging simple string messages >>>>>>>> without params.) This is worrisome and I'm focusing on figuring that >>>>>>>> out >>>>>>>> first: this will likely involve additional code changes and I'll add >>>>>>>> more >>>>>>>> tests after that. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On 2016/02/26, at 10:38, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wow, I love the activity we are seeing toward 2.6! All the perf >>>>>>>> work on top of an existing sizable change set. Very exciting indeed. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> There sure are a lot of changes coming in. I hope that we all can >>>>>>>> pitch in to make sure most if not all of these changes get code >>>>>>>> coverage >>>>>>>> from unit tests. I've not checked closely, but it seems like we may not >>>>>>>> have good coverage _yet_, or do I have the wrong impression? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I want to make sure we keep our stability in tip top shape :-) and >>>>>>>> that we have no regression from previous releases. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gary >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> -- >>>>>>>> E-Mail: garydgreg...@gmail.com | ggreg...@apache.org >>>>>>>> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition >>>>>>>> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/> >>>>>>>> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/> >>>>>>>> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/> >>>>>>>> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com >>>>>>>> Home: http://garygregory.com/ >>>>>>>> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> [image: MagineTV] >>>>>> >>>>>> *Mikael Ståldal* >>>>>> Senior software developer >>>>>> >>>>>> *Magine TV* >>>>>> mikael.stal...@magine.com >>>>>> Grev Turegatan 3 | 114 46 Stockholm, Sweden | www.magine.com >>>>>> >>>>>> Privileged and/or Confidential Information may be contained in this >>>>>> message. If you are not the addressee indicated in this message >>>>>> (or responsible for delivery of the message to such a person), you >>>>>> may not copy or deliver this message to anyone. In such case, >>>>>> you should destroy this message and kindly notify the sender by reply >>>>>> email. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com> >> > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
