benchmark: split timers benchmark and refactor#9497
Closed
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Trott added timers 
benchmark/timers/timers-breadth.js Outdated
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
the filename is included in the output, so this is not needed.
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets a timer that... 500K of them. Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop benchmark than a timer benchmark. Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the timer. Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their `N` values can be set independently. Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js). Refs: nodejs#9493
lpinca reviewed Nov 8, 2016
| var common = require('../common.js'); | ||
| var bench = common.createBenchmark(main,{ | ||
| thousands: [500], |
lpinca reviewed Nov 8, 2016
| var common = require('../common.js'); | ||
| var bench = common.createBenchmark(main,{ | ||
| thousands: [1], |
cjihrig approved these changes Nov 8, 2016
Fishrock123 approved these changes Nov 8, 2016
MemberAuthor
Trott commented Nov 10, 2016
MemberAuthor
Trott commented Nov 10, 2016
Landed in ef6a5cf |
Trott added a commit to Trott/io.js that referenced this pull request Nov 10, 2016
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets a timer that... 500K of them. Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop benchmark than a timer benchmark. Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the timer. Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their `N` values can be set independently. Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js). Refs: nodejs#9493 PR-URL: nodejs#9497 Reviewed-By: Andreas Madsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
addaleax pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 22, 2016
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets a timer that... 500K of them. Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop benchmark than a timer benchmark. Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the timer. Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their `N` values can be set independently. Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js). Refs: #9493 PR-URL: #9497 Reviewed-By: Andreas Madsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
Contributor
MylesBorins commented Dec 13, 2016
@Trott do you think this should be backported? |
MemberAuthor
Trott commented Dec 13, 2016
@thealphanerd Yes. (Is landing cleanly for me on both v4.x-staging and v6.x-staging.) |
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets a timer that... 500K of them. Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop benchmark than a timer benchmark. Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the timer. Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their `N` values can be set independently. Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js). Refs: #9493 PR-URL: #9497 Reviewed-By: Andreas Madsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets a timer that... 500K of them. Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop benchmark than a timer benchmark. Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the timer. Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their `N` values can be set independently. Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js). Refs: #9493 PR-URL: #9497 Reviewed-By: Andreas Madsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets a timer that... 500K of them. Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop benchmark than a timer benchmark. Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the timer. Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their `N` values can be set independently. Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js). Refs: #9493 PR-URL: #9497 Reviewed-By: Andreas Madsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets a timer that... 500K of them. Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop benchmark than a timer benchmark. Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the timer. Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their `N` values can be set independently. Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js). Refs: #9493 PR-URL: #9497 Reviewed-By: Andreas Madsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2016
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets a timer that... 500K of them. Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop benchmark than a timer benchmark. Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the timer. Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their `N` values can be set independently. Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js). Refs: #9493 PR-URL: #9497 Reviewed-By: Andreas Madsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
Sign up for freeto join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
6 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Checklist
make -j8 test(UNIX), orvcbuild test nosign(Windows) passesAffected core subsystem(s)
benchmark timers
Description of change
The depth benchmark for timers sets a timer that sets a timer that sets
a timer that... 500K of them.
Since each timer has to wait for the next tick of the event loop this
benchmark takes a very long time to run compared to the breadth
test that is already in the file. This may be more of an event loop
benchmark than a timer benchmark.
Reduce the number of iterations for the depth test as it's really just
running the iterations in sequence, not in parallel. And even on an
infinitely fast machine, it would take over 8 minutes to run because
each tick of the event loop would have to wait 1ms before firing the
timer.
Split the depth and breadth benchmarks so that their
Nvalues can beset independently.
Do some minor refactoring to the benchmarks (but no ES6 additions so
that the benchmarks can still be run with old versions of Node.js).
Refs: #9493