##// END OF EJS Templates
perf: add command for measuring revlog chunk operations...
perf: add command for measuring revlog chunk operations Upcoming commits will teach revlogs to leverage the new compression engine API so that new compression formats can more easily be leveraged in revlogs. We want to be sure this refactoring doesn't regress performance. So this commit introduces "perfrevchunks" to explicitly test performance of reading, decompressing, and recompressing revlog chunks. Here is output when run on the mozilla-unified repo: $ hg perfrevlogchunks -c ! read ! wall 0.346603 comb 0.350000 user 0.340000 sys 0.010000 (best of 28) ! read w/ reused fd ! wall 0.337707 comb 0.340000 user 0.320000 sys 0.020000 (best of 30) ! read batch ! wall 0.013206 comb 0.020000 user 0.000000 sys 0.020000 (best of 221) ! read batch w/ reused fd ! wall 0.013259 comb 0.030000 user 0.010000 sys 0.020000 (best of 222) ! chunk ! wall 1.909939 comb 1.910000 user 1.900000 sys 0.010000 (best of 6) ! chunk batch ! wall 1.750677 comb 1.760000 user 1.740000 sys 0.020000 (best of 6) ! compress ! wall 5.668004 comb 5.670000 user 5.670000 sys 0.000000 (best of 3) $ hg perfrevlogchunks -m ! read ! wall 0.365834 comb 0.370000 user 0.350000 sys 0.020000 (best of 26) ! read w/ reused fd ! wall 0.350160 comb 0.350000 user 0.320000 sys 0.030000 (best of 28) ! read batch ! wall 0.024777 comb 0.020000 user 0.000000 sys 0.020000 (best of 119) ! read batch w/ reused fd ! wall 0.024895 comb 0.030000 user 0.000000 sys 0.030000 (best of 118) ! chunk ! wall 2.514061 comb 2.520000 user 2.480000 sys 0.040000 (best of 4) ! chunk batch ! wall 2.380788 comb 2.380000 user 2.360000 sys 0.020000 (best of 5) ! compress ! wall 9.815297 comb 9.820000 user 9.820000 sys 0.000000 (best of 3) We already see some interesting data, such as how much slower non-batched chunk reading is and that zlib compression appears to be >2x slower than decompression. I didn't have the data when I wrote this commit message, but I ran this on Mozilla's NFS-based Mercurial server and the time for reading with a reused file descriptor was faster. So I think it is worth testing both with and without file descriptor reuse so we can make informed decisions about recycling file descriptors.

File last commit:

r25295:701df761 default
r30451:94ca0e13 default
Show More
test-convert-clonebranches.t
87 lines | 2.0 KiB | text/troff | Tads3Lexer
/ tests / test-convert-clonebranches.t
$ cat <<EOF >> $HGRCPATH
> [extensions]
> convert =
> [convert]
> hg.tagsbranch = 0
> EOF
$ hg init source
$ cd source
$ echo a > a
$ hg ci -qAm adda
Add a merge with one parent in the same branch
$ echo a >> a
$ hg ci -qAm changea
$ hg up -qC 0
$ hg branch branch0
marked working directory as branch branch0
(branches are permanent and global, did you want a bookmark?)
$ echo b > b
$ hg ci -qAm addb
$ hg up -qC
$ hg merge default
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
(branch merge, don't forget to commit)
$ hg ci -qm mergeab
$ hg tag -ql mergeab
$ cd ..
Miss perl... sometimes
$ cat > filter.py <<EOF
> import sys, re
>
> r = re.compile(r'^(?:\d+|pulling from)')
> sys.stdout.writelines([l for l in sys.stdin if r.search(l)])
> EOF
convert
$ hg convert -v --config convert.hg.clonebranches=1 source dest |
> python filter.py
3 adda
2 changea
1 addb
pulling from default into branch0
1 changesets found
0 mergeab
pulling from default into branch0
1 changesets found
Add a merge with both parents and child in different branches
$ cd source
$ hg branch branch1
marked working directory as branch branch1
$ echo a > file1
$ hg ci -qAm c1
$ hg up -qC mergeab
$ hg branch branch2
marked working directory as branch branch2
$ echo a > file2
$ hg ci -qAm c2
$ hg merge branch1
1 files updated, 0 files merged, 0 files removed, 0 files unresolved
(branch merge, don't forget to commit)
$ hg branch branch3
marked working directory as branch branch3
$ hg ci -qAm c3
$ cd ..
incremental conversion
$ hg convert -v --config convert.hg.clonebranches=1 source dest |
> python filter.py
2 c1
pulling from branch0 into branch1
4 changesets found
1 c2
pulling from branch0 into branch2
4 changesets found
0 c3
pulling from branch1 into branch3
5 changesets found
pulling from branch2 into branch3
1 changesets found