All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Thomas Rast <trast@inf.ethz.ch>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: git@vger.kernel.org, "Nguyễn Thái Ngọc Duy" <pclouds@gmail.com>,
	"Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Hold an 'unsigned long' chunk of the sha1 in obj_hash
Date: Thu, 2 May 2013 10:52:04 +0200	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87vc71u5l7.fsf@linux-k42r.v.cablecom.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20130501204947.GA12789@sigill.intra.peff.net> (Jeff King's message of "Wed, 1 May 2013 16:49:47 -0400")

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> It _might_ still be advantageous to do your patch on top, but I suspect
> it will diminish the returns from your patch (since the point of it is
> to probe less far down the chain on average).

No, mine makes it slower again.  Apparently the increased size is no
longer worth it.  You'll need a wide window to read this:

Test                                  next              tr/hash-speedup            jk/hash-speedup             both-hash-speedup        
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
0001.1: rev-list --all                0.66(0.63+0.02)   0.66(0.63+0.03) -0.4%      0.66(0.63+0.03) -0.6%       0.66(0.62+0.03) -0.6%    
0001.2: rev-list --all --objects      4.12(4.05+0.05)   3.81(3.74+0.06) -7.6%***   3.50(3.43+0.05) -15.1%***   3.56(3.49+0.05) -13.7%***
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Note that the scripts always generate the percentages and significance
w.r.t. the first column.  Comparing yours with both instead gives

Test                               jk/hash-speedup   both-hash-speedup     
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
0001.1: rev-list --all             0.66(0.63+0.03)   0.66(0.62+0.03) +0.0% 
0001.2: rev-list --all --objects   3.50(3.43+0.05)   3.56(3.49+0.05) +1.6%*
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

which is still significant (in the statistical p=5% sense).

For kicks I also ran some other tests, which generally show that the
speedups are limited to this specific workload:

Test                                  next              tr/hash-speedup          jk/hash-speedup         both-hash-speedup     
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3201.1: branch --contains             0.76(0.74+0.02)   0.75(0.73+0.02) -1.0%*   0.77(0.74+0.02) +0.7%   0.76(0.73+0.02) -0.7% 
4000.1: log -3000 (baseline)          0.12(0.09+0.02)   0.12(0.10+0.02) +3.2%    0.12(0.10+0.01) +0.0%   0.12(0.10+0.02) +3.2% 
4000.2: log --raw -3000 (tree-only)   0.53(0.47+0.05)   0.52(0.46+0.05) -0.9%    0.53(0.46+0.06) +0.0%   0.52(0.45+0.06) -0.9% 
4000.3: log -p -3000 (Myers)          2.39(2.23+0.14)   2.38(2.23+0.13) -0.4%    2.38(2.23+0.14) -0.4%   2.38(2.23+0.13) -0.5% 
4000.4: log -p -3000 --histogram      2.43(2.28+0.13)   2.43(2.28+0.13) -0.0%    2.43(2.28+0.13) -0.1%   2.43(2.28+0.14) +0.1% 
4000.5: log -p -3000 --patience       2.72(2.57+0.12)   2.74(2.59+0.12) +0.7%    2.72(2.57+0.13) +0.2%   2.74(2.59+0.13) +0.8%.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Thomas Rast
trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch

      parent reply	other threads:[~2013-05-02  8:52 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-04-25 18:04 [PATCH] Hold an 'unsigned long' chunk of the sha1 in obj_hash Thomas Rast
2013-04-25 20:13 ` Junio C Hamano
2013-04-25 21:09   ` Thomas Rast
2013-04-25 21:12 ` Duy Nguyen
2013-05-01 20:49 ` Jeff King
2013-05-02  0:53   ` [PATCH] process tree diffs during "rev-list --objects" Jeff King
2013-05-02  8:52   ` Thomas Rast [this message]

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87vc71u5l7.fsf@linux-k42r.v.cablecom.net \
    --to=trast@inf.ethz.ch \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=pclouds@gmail.com \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.