From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [209.132.180.67]) by dcvr.yhbt.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4927E20189 for ; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 19:39:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752230AbcFVTjI (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:39:08 -0400 Received: from cloud.peff.net ([50.56.180.127]:58725 "HELO cloud.peff.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1751400AbcFVTjH (ORCPT ); Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:39:07 -0400 Received: (qmail 7379 invoked by uid 102); 22 Jun 2016 19:39:06 -0000 Received: from Unknown (HELO peff.net) (10.0.1.2) by cloud.peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:39:06 -0400 Received: (qmail 5004 invoked by uid 107); 22 Jun 2016 19:39:21 -0000 Received: from sigill.intra.peff.net (HELO sigill.intra.peff.net) (10.0.0.7) by peff.net (qpsmtpd/0.84) with SMTP; Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:39:21 -0400 Received: by sigill.intra.peff.net (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:39:04 -0400 Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2016 15:39:04 -0400 From: Jeff King To: git@vger.kernel.org Cc: Johannes Schindelin Subject: [PATCH 0/2] t/perf tests against older versions Message-ID: <20160622193904.GA1509@sigill.intra.peff.net> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org One of the points of the t/perf suite is to be able to detect performance regressions between versions. But I don't think anybody really runs it systematically; we mostly just use it to show off our shiny new improvements. :) So I decided to run the suite against v2.0.0 and v2.9.0, to catch any regressions that have crept in the past few years. The good news is that there aren't any. But I did need a few patches to show that: [1/2]: t/perf: fix regression in testing older versions of git [2/2]: p4211: explicitly disable renames in no-rename test The first one fixes the issue I reported in [1], which let me run the suite against v2.0.0 at all. And the second fixes something that looks like a regression in the results, but really isn't. -Peff [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/297875