Hello,
On 02/05/2023 00:55, Michael Paquier wrote:
> Well, these are nice numbers. At ~1% I am ready to buy the noise
> argument, but what would the range of the usual noise when it comes to
> multiple runs under the same conditions>
I managed to get my patch tested in the TechEmpower Framework Benchmarks
continuous benchmarking environment, and even though it takes roughly a
week to get a new set of results, now there had been a couple of runs
both with and without my changes. All 4 database-bound Web application
tests (single query, multiple queries, fortunes, and data updates) saw
improvements, by approximately 8.94%, 0.64%, 9.54%, and 2.78%
respectively. The standard errors were 0.65% or less, so there was
practically no change in the second test. However, I have seen another
implementation experience a much larger improvement (~6.69%) in that
test from essentially the same optimization, so I think that my own code
has another bottleneck. Note that these test runs were not in the same
benchmarking environment as the one I used previously for a quick check,
so the values differ. Also, another set of results should become
available in a week or so (and would be based on my optimization).
Links to the test runs:
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=test&runid=1ecf679a-9686-4de7-a3b7-de16a1a84bb6&l=zik0zi-35r&w=zhb2tb-zik0zj-zik0zj-sf&test=db
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=test&runid=aab00736-445c-4b7f-83b5-451c47c83395&l=zik0zi-35r&w=zhb2tb-zik0zj-zik0zj-sf&test=db
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=test&runid=bc7f7570-a88e-48e3-9874-06d7dc0a0f74&l=zik0zi-35r&w=zhb2tb-zik0zj-zik0zj-sf&test=db
https://www.techempower.com/benchmarks/#section=test&runid=e6dd1abd-7aa2-4846-9b44-d8fd8a23d385&l=zik0zi-35r&w=zhb2tb-zik0zj-zik0zj-sf&test=db
(ordered chronologically; the first 2 did not include my optimization)
Best wishes,
Anton Kirilov