[RFC] simulating network properties for benchmarks
Carl Friedrich Bolz
cfbolz at gmx.de
Fri Jul 21 14:39:09 BST 2006
Martin Pool wrote:
> On 21 Jul 2006, Aaron Bentley <aaron.bentley at utoronto.ca> wrote:
>> Robert Collins wrote:
>>> Heres a prototype of what I was referring to. The decorator in it was
>>> quick-coded, if the future directions I mention in it are to be done, it
>>> would deserve unit tests, as high layer tests could no longer test it at
>>> that point.
>>> I'm pushing this up to
>>> sftp://bazaar.launchpad.net/~bzr/bzr/test-sftp-latency now.
>> This is the approach seems pretty natural to me. But an interesting
>> alternative would be for the transport to not sleep, but instead, move
>> the clock ahead. That would mean we could simulate slow operations
>> quickly, which would make such tests easier to run.
>> Obviously we can't change the system clock, but we could have the
>> transport update a global variable, and have the bench suite use that
>> for its calculations.
> And then basically show it as e.g. "4.2s real time, 123.2s simulated
> IO". It could be nice.
Shouldn't be too hard to switch between the two (or even have both :-).
Just make it possible to override the function that the proxy socket
uses to sleep.
>> The disadvantage is that lsprof won't understand what's going on-- but
>> does sleep show up in lsprof, or does it measure CPU time?
> I'm not sure. I thought it was wall time.
I think so too, yes. I think it would indeed be useful to track the
sleeps with lsprof.
More information about the bazaar