On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <email address hidden> wrote:
> I ran ZODB's speed.py (a little modified, since cache_deactivate_after
> doesn't exist any longer) and collective.zodbbench, but they were
> affected by noise of disk I/O very much, so I didn't see much
> difference, although I am sure that my changes didn't decrease the
> performance.
>
> I would like to see a bit more realistic test, if any. Do you have any
> recommendation?
I have a realistic benchmark that involves actual database data.
It uses an experimental branch, replay, of zc.zeoinputlog. This is a work
in progress, so only especially hardy souls should try to use this package
themselves. :)
When I get a chance, I'll use my setup to evaluate your patches.
On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 5:50 AM, Yoshinori K. Okuji <email address hidden> wrote: e_after zodbbench, but they were
> I ran ZODB's speed.py (a little modified, since cache_deactivat
> doesn't exist any longer) and collective.
> affected by noise of disk I/O very much, so I didn't see much
> difference, although I am sure that my changes didn't decrease the
> performance.
>
> I would like to see a bit more realistic test, if any. Do you have any
> recommendation?
I have a realistic benchmark that involves actual database data.
It uses an experimental branch, replay, of zc.zeoinputlog. This is a work
in progress, so only especially hardy souls should try to use this package
themselves. :)
When I get a chance, I'll use my setup to evaluate your patches.
Jim
--
Jim Fulton