[RFC] tweak merge-approval criterion: performance

Alexander Belchenko bialix at ukr.net
Wed Sep 5 08:55:38 BST 2007

Hash: SHA1

Martin Pool пишет:
> On 9/5/07, Marius Kruger <amanic at gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 9/4/07, Ian Clatworthy <ian.clatworthy at internode.on.net> wrote:
>>> I'm not sure profiling every potential change by hand is practical. If
>>> it's automated PQM-like, that's different. Until then, I think some
>>> focussed performance regression testing during the freeze period - which
>>> I've been doing for some months BTW - together with keeping up good
>>> reviews is acceptable.
>> I think it would be good to have performance testing suite,
>> which could print the times for certain things, and at the end
>> we can assert if its acceptable compared to previous runs.
>> It might make sense to get some system running these tests
>> on a weekly basis and post the improvements or disimprovements
>> to the list.
> We do actually have a machine doing that, at
> http://benchmark.bazaar-vcs.org/  The output at the moment is a bit
> technical, with the summary table right down the bottom.  It does not
> send mail at present.

Newer saw this URL.
Report is interesting and show something that looks like regression:

+ date -u
Tue Aug  7 07:23:31 UTC 2007
+ echo

- --- Measurements of time ---
Tools:                          bzr        bzr-0.18        bzr-0.17
time add                     10.566           8.313           7.710 (s)
time status                  30.466          30.289          10.202 (s)

And this one is really cool:

- --- Measurements of time ---
Tools:                          bzr        bzr-0.18        bzr-0.17
time bundle                   0.207          20.309          20.291 (s)

Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


More information about the bazaar mailing list