From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from vger.kernel.org (vger.kernel.org [23.128.96.18]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4CA37C433EF for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2022 18:24:22 +0000 (UTC) Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S229912AbiGOSXv (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2022 14:23:51 -0400 Received: from lindbergh.monkeyblade.net ([23.128.96.19]:46442 "EHLO lindbergh.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S230003AbiGOSXn (ORCPT ); Fri, 15 Jul 2022 14:23:43 -0400 Received: from mail-ej1-x62c.google.com (mail-ej1-x62c.google.com [IPv6:2a00:1450:4864:20::62c]) by lindbergh.monkeyblade.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4A4DCD44 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2022 11:23:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-ej1-x62c.google.com with SMTP id j22so10402700ejs.2 for ; Fri, 15 Jul 2022 11:23:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=FCg6iIJhee7SbG0IxG4oxz8eY1AHqvZEmGEZxQZwpwM=; b=kHhZ319mncGQ+6keAvdkmPALCBmVOw8PuCo3d4BiEsT42PyjlWYO/wEV3OkdHBQEq0 l6Pkxy1EQDv9gpNu2lr6kGst/Mzz/P2q9nhCpABAcBP1fWgyYnIAZhes+C/hG4wG+aWj M6khhQkWEE5uXnLMStLerhBT+kPAdNURlLCmMpnT549eF2LZNoWtdrgP/lyZ+02Jw3Bh JB9EqD1es5R7BAUI8WhiIKKym88JE4sHouUgDXLgpcKtJ/owyzTUsgpjDL6iBUaZZnhR TWCKjb0uFJaJ6Sb0W/IwDQMiZS7gKnHPUmk926iFoaqeNABPNbyHVUQ1Ay7z8d3W4m/d ITag== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FCg6iIJhee7SbG0IxG4oxz8eY1AHqvZEmGEZxQZwpwM=; b=mO3E+5PU7m05hKkje8qsTrdhxe4fx4ntF2UPP0J+m+/fGzAEH2BUG/yOEpEt1IeT70 drSw8tRrTkV9/3J5y4vNzlotyIq+xELUZ48nD4IN5ZW+GWzxGo0j6pGD716PEkBREZ2o mpAw8b9la17Zp06z/7nNdc8C69BS5kEuT3VOUjx9sobS4jCnutA5yRcVtzeoks7bWlBO KiZaUO4tgA165ZUB95RmvUIywK3wb5/Bn4ZqF36PiAXnNXGFKgmqxUwXjg/DnPD9B4Yx 3jy3Ag68oN01YJ9dctObjg+2mP35diZLsAmxncX2Xvo0KRD4G2lgiIIyluu+CvJOudHh w00A== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora8s2TKjFmsEdcEGjVxL7L7EOfhvwhjxpwP9QDcRd6jNsv5XeB1x ep7OFwQAf0mbqtMOFQcCPyeWF7hnrBtwB1PI95E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1tkmGP/eLkga5Xa/whCZMdOX7mMrcpMYHT0SJFVLYdqGhYYXGhwAb5vWOFd/4XZDp0yvUbyEuh1l6Nhk/yvIAY= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:58cf:b0:722:e4e1:c174 with SMTP id e15-20020a17090658cf00b00722e4e1c174mr14798954ejs.85.1657909416839; Fri, 15 Jul 2022 11:23:36 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Abhradeep Chakraborty Date: Fri, 15 Jul 2022 23:53:25 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 5/6] bitmap-lookup-table: add performance tests for lookup table To: Taylor Blau Cc: Abhradeep Chakraborty via GitGitGadget , git , Kaartic Sivaram , Derrick Stolee Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org On Fri, Jul 15, 2022 at 8:23 AM Taylor Blau wrote: > > Having "lookup=false" in this test definitely helps visually > differentiate which tests have a bitmap with and without the lookup > table. > > I think we should take a slightly different approach for these > performance tests. I think the first change to the t/perf tests in this > series should only enable `pack.writeReverseIndex`. That patch would be > a good place to highlight the benefit of enabling the on-disk reverse > index by showing a before and after of running p5310 before and after > that commit. > > Then the patch after that should look like this one, which runs the > suite with and without the lookup table. That should give us a sense of: > > - bitmaps without a lookup table or reverse index > - bitmaps without a lookup table, but with a reverse index > - bitamps with a reverse index and a lookup table > > ...which I think are the most interesting combinations (I wouldn't > expect many or any users to have lookup tables enabled without reverse > indexes). > > I think that would allow us to drop the last patch in this version of > the series. But I'm definitely open to other testing strategies for the > performance tests (including this one!) if you have different thoughts > about what the best way to go about this is. Got it. Thanks ! > Thanks, > Taylor