Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

http://imgur.com/a/vVKSx This one is the original 128MB PUT test but on a Raspberry Pi Zero W (client and server). Raspbian is based on Debian Jesse which uses Svn 1.8.10. The Zero has 512MB RAM and a 1Ghz ARM chip (the same spec as the original Pi). Performance was 1/6 of the CHUWI HiBox Smart

Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

Markus, Yes, leaving rep sharing enabled is better for another reason that a file sync agent is *likely* to encounter: someone renames a directory. Remember I'm not using Subversion client tools to effect a commit. But... >. Rep sharing brings its real benefits when equal files are stored >

RE: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

M To: Markus Schaber Cc: Subversion Development Subject: Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

> > > Here it is - http://imgur.com/a/vBeKi - a more interesting graph. > Note that was 4 iterations, not 6 (as before). Server side Storage Used (MB): Default: 129 No_Compression_No_Deltification: 257 No_Deltification_No_Rep_Sharing: 513 No_Compression_No_Deltification_No_Rep_Sharing: 513

Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

> > Next up - larger files where the second has a mid-section that changes for > a few bytes, vs the first. > Here it is - http://imgur.com/a/vBeKi - a more interesting graph.

Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

Alternate file sizes - still pretty much every byte different between the two alternately uploaded files: 24MB - http://imgur.com/a/kPyY8 4MB - http://imgur.com/a/uRaW8 Next up - larger files where the second has a mid-section that changes for a few bytes, vs the first.

Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

I'll re-run for smaller sizes (and yes that 128GB was a typo) Things won't be not so separable that way, IIRC.

Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 5:36 AM, Paul Hammant wrote: > Chart: > > http://imgur.com/cKe2l4J > > In Python I made two 128GB random files, then uploaded them alternately six > ties three each to the same endpoint in Svn over DAV. That would be a run. > After wiping the server

RE: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

sclosure or distribution of the material in this e-mail is strictly forbidden. From: Paul Hammant [mailto:p...@hammant.org] Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 9:05 AM To: Subversion Development Subject: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings. Chart: http://imgur.com/cKe2l4J In Python

Re: Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

If I can manage to build the LZW compression version of the forthcoming v1.11 Subversion, I'll put that in the mix as a permutation to test. Is anyone interested in the Python harness for these integration tests? - Paul

Benchmarks for PUT for various fsfs config settings.

Chart: http://imgur.com/cKe2l4J In Python I made two 128GB random files, then uploaded them alternately six ties three each to the same endpoint in Svn over DAV. That would be a run. After wiping the server repo and repeating that, I performed four runs all in all. For each datapoint, I