Skip to content

bench: add logging benchmarks for LogPrintLevel and LogPrintfCategory #25586

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

bench: add logging benchmarks for LogPrintLevel and LogPrintfCategory #25586

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

jonatack
Copy link
Member

@jonatack jonatack commented Jul 11, 2022 •
edited
Loading

LogPrintLevel and LogPrintfCategory were recently added to the logging macros in #24464 and #25306, respectively. Our logging is expected to primarily use these methods, so it makes sense to benchmark them.

This pull adds benchmarks for both of them to the logging benchmarks, improves the existing benchmark naming to be clearer and with a more coherent output order, and sorts the benchmark code in that order.

$ NANOBENCH_SUPPRESS_WARNINGS=1 ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter=Log*.*

before

|               ns/op |                op/s |    err% |     total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
|               75.82 |       13,189,445.28 |    5.3% |      0.01 | `LoggingNoCategory`
|            1,344.86 |          743,571.82 |   19.8% |      0.01 | `LoggingNoFile`
|           15,341.11 |           65,184.34 |   19.6% |      0.01 | `LoggingNoThreadNames`
|           22,790.48 |           43,877.96 |   36.3% |      0.01 | `LoggingYoCategory`
|           22,972.32 |           43,530.65 |    7.4% |      0.01 | `LoggingYoThreadNames`

after

$ NANOBENCH_SUPPRESS_WARNINGS=1 ./src/bench/bench_bitcoin -filter=Log*.*

|               ns/op |                op/s |    err% |     total | benchmark
|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------:|:----------
|            2,497.81 |          400,349.92 |   25.1% |      0.01 | `LogNoDebugLogFile`
|           30,758.83 |           32,510.99 |   18.8% |      0.01 | `LogPrintLevelWithThreadNames`
|           25,559.50 |           39,124.40 |    7.1% |      0.01 | `LogPrintLevelWithoutThreadNames`
|           22,128.45 |           45,190.70 |    2.2% |      0.01 | `LogPrintWithCategory`
|           21,888.91 |           45,685.23 |    6.3% |      0.01 | `LogPrintWithoutCategory`
|           28,293.11 |           35,344.29 |    4.9% |      0.01 | `LogPrintfCategoryWithThreadNames`
|           24,329.70 |           41,102.03 |    7.3% |      0.01 | `LogPrintfCategoryWithoutThreadNames`
|           26,814.71 |           37,292.97 |    6.9% |      0.01 | `LogPrintfWithThreadNames`
|           18,139.46 |           55,128.43 |   20.9% |      0.01 | `LogPrintfWithoutThreadNames`

@jonatack jonatack force-pushed the add-logging-benchmarks branch from 478272d to f896ef9 Compare July 11, 2022 11:48
@jonatack jonatack changed the title bench: add logging benchmarks for LogPrintLevel and LogPrintfCategory bench: add benchmarks for LogPrintLevel, LogPrintfCategory, and lock contention logging Jul 11, 2022
@jonatack jonatack force-pushed the add-logging-benchmarks branch from f896ef9 to 147f479 Compare July 11, 2022 11:58
@jonatack jonatack changed the title bench: add benchmarks for LogPrintLevel, LogPrintfCategory, and lock contention logging bench: add logging benchmarks for LogPrintLevel and LogPrintfCategory Jul 11, 2022
@DrahtBot DrahtBot added the Tests label Jul 11, 2022
@fanquake
Copy link
Member

~0 - I'm not really convinced we need more benchmarks for logging code.

@jonatack
Copy link
Member Author

jonatack commented Aug 5, 2022

This change makes sense given that the codebase is migrating to these methods but closing for now, will try again later.

@jonatack jonatack closed this Aug 5, 2022
@jonatack jonatack mentioned this pull request Aug 22, 2022
Merged
@bitcoin bitcoin locked and limited conversation to collaborators Aug 22, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Tests
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
3 participants
@jonatack @fanquake @DrahtBot