summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/t/perf/p5310-pack-bitmaps.sh
AgeCommit message (Collapse)AuthorFilesLines
2016-09-12pack-objects: use reachability bitmap index when generating non-stdout packLibravatar Kirill Smelkov1-1/+13
Starting from 6b8fda2d (pack-objects: use bitmaps when packing objects) if a repository has bitmap index, pack-objects can nicely speedup "Counting objects" graph traversal phase. That however was done only for case when resultant pack is sent to stdout, not written into a file. The reason here is for on-disk repack by default we want: - to produce good pack (with bitmap index not-yet-packed objects are emitted to pack in suboptimal order). - to use more robust pack-generation codepath (avoiding possible bugs in bitmap code and possible bitmap index corruption). Jeff King further explains: The reason for this split is that pack-objects tries to determine how "careful" it should be based on whether we are packing to disk or to stdout. Packing to disk implies "git repack", and that we will likely delete the old packs after finishing. We want to be more careful (so as not to carry forward a corruption, and to generate a more optimal pack), and we presumably run less frequently and can afford extra CPU. Whereas packing to stdout implies serving a remote via "git fetch" or "git push". This happens more frequently (e.g., a server handling many fetching clients), and we assume the receiving end takes more responsibility for verifying the data. But this isn't always the case. One might want to generate on-disk packfiles for a specialized object transfer. Just using "--stdout" and writing to a file is not optimal, as it will not generate the matching pack index. So it would be useful to have some way of overriding this heuristic: to tell pack-objects that even though it should generate on-disk files, it is still OK to use the reachability bitmaps to do the traversal. So we can teach pack-objects to use bitmap index for initial object counting phase when generating resultant pack file too: - if we take care to not let it be activated under git-repack: See above about repack robustness and not forward-carrying corruption. - if we know bitmap index generation is not enabled for resultant pack: The current code has singleton bitmap_git, so it cannot work simultaneously with two bitmap indices. We also want to avoid (at least with current implementation) generating bitmaps off of bitmaps. The reason here is: when generating a pack, not-yet-packed objects will be emitted into pack in suboptimal order and added to tail of the bitmap as "extended entries". When the resultant pack + some new objects in associated repository are in turn used to generate another pack with bitmap, the situation repeats: new objects are again not emitted optimally and just added to bitmap tail - not in recency order. So the pack badness can grow over time when at each step we have bitmapped pack + some other objects. That's why we want to avoid generating bitmaps off of bitmaps, not to let pack badness grow. - if we keep pack reuse enabled still only for "send-to-stdout" case: Because pack-to-file needs to generate index for destination pack, and currently on pack reuse raw entries are directly written out to the destination pack by write_reused_pack(), bypassing needed for pack index generation bookkeeping done by regular codepath in write_one() and friends. ( In the future we might teach pack-reuse code about cases when index also needs to be generated for resultant pack and remove pack-reuse-only-for-stdout limitation ) This way for pack-objects -> file we get nice speedup: erp5.git[1] (~230MB) extracted from ~ 5GB lab.nexedi.com backup repository managed by git-backup[2] via time echo 0186ac99 | git pack-objects --revs erp5pack before: 37.2s after: 26.2s And for `git repack -adb` packed git.git time echo 5c589a73 | git pack-objects --revs gitpack before: 7.1s after: 3.6s i.e. it can be 30% - 50% speedup for pack extraction. git-backup extracts many packs on repositories restoration. That was my initial motivation for the patch. [1] https://lab.nexedi.com/nexedi/erp5 [2] https://lab.nexedi.com/kirr/git-backup NOTE Jeff also suggests that pack.useBitmaps was probably a mistake to introduce originally. This way we are not adding another config point, but instead just always default to-file pack-objects not to use bitmap index: Tools which need to generate on-disk packs with using bitmap, can pass --use-bitmap-index explicitly. And git-repack does never pass --use-bitmap-index, so this way we can be sure regular on-disk repacking remains robust. NOTE2 `git pack-objects --stdout >file.pack` + `git index-pack file.pack` is much slower than `git pack-objects file.pack`. Extracting erp5.git pack from lab.nexedi.com backup repository: $ time echo 0186ac99 | git pack-objects --stdout --revs >erp5pack-stdout.pack real 0m22.309s user 0m21.148s sys 0m0.932s $ time git index-pack erp5pack-stdout.pack real 0m50.873s <-- more than 2 times slower than time to generate pack itself! user 0m49.300s sys 0m1.360s So the time for `pack-object --stdout >file.pack` + `index-pack file.pack` is 72s, while `pack-objects file.pack` which does both pack and index is 27s. And even `pack-objects --no-use-bitmap-index file.pack` is 37s. Jeff explains: The packfile does not carry the sha1 of the objects. A receiving index-pack has to compute them itself, including inflating and applying all of the deltas. that's why for `git-backup restore` we want to teach `git pack-objects file.pack` to use bitmaps instead of using `git pack-objects --stdout >file.pack` + `git index-pack file.pack`. NOTE3 The speedup is now tracked via t/perf/p5310-pack-bitmaps.sh Test 56dfeb62 this tree -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5310.2: repack to disk 8.98(8.05+0.29) 9.05(8.08+0.33) +0.8% 5310.3: simulated clone 2.02(2.27+0.09) 2.01(2.25+0.08) -0.5% 5310.4: simulated fetch 0.81(1.07+0.02) 0.81(1.05+0.04) +0.0% 5310.5: pack to file 7.58(7.04+0.28) 7.60(7.04+0.30) +0.3% 5310.6: pack to file (bitmap) 7.55(7.02+0.28) 3.25(2.82+0.18) -57.0% 5310.8: clone (partial bitmap) 1.83(2.26+0.12) 1.82(2.22+0.14) -0.5% 5310.9: pack to file (partial bitmap) 6.86(6.58+0.30) 2.87(2.74+0.20) -58.2% More context: http://marc.info/?t=146792101400001&r=1&w=2 http://public-inbox.org/git/20160707190917.20011-1-kirr@nexedi.com/T/#t Cc: Vicent Marti <tanoku@gmail.com> Helped-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Kirill Smelkov <kirr@nexedi.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2015-06-26p5310: Fix broken && chain in performance testLibravatar Stefan Beller1-3/+3
Signed-off-by: Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2014-06-10repack: introduce repack.writeBitmaps config optionLibravatar Jeff King1-0/+3
We currently have pack.writeBitmaps, which originally operated at the pack-objects level. This should really have been a repack.* option from day one. Let's give it the more sensible name, but keep the old version as a deprecated synonym. Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-30pack-bitmap: implement optional name_hash cacheLibravatar Vicent Marti1-1/+2
When we use pack bitmaps rather than walking the object graph, we end up with the list of objects to include in the packfile, but we do not know the path at which any tree or blob objects would be found. In a recently packed repository, this is fine. A fetch would use the paths only as a heuristic in the delta compression phase, and a fully packed repository should not need to do much delta compression. As time passes, though, we may acquire more objects on top of our large bitmapped pack. If clients fetch frequently, then they never even look at the bitmapped history, and all works as usual. However, a client who has not fetched since the last bitmap repack will have "have" tips in the bitmapped history, but "want" newer objects. The bitmaps themselves degrade gracefully in this circumstance. We manually walk the more recent bits of history, and then use bitmaps when we hit them. But we would also like to perform delta compression between the newer objects and the bitmapped objects (both to delta against what we know the user already has, but also between "new" and "old" objects that the user is fetching). The lack of pathnames makes our delta heuristics much less effective. This patch adds an optional cache of the 32-bit name_hash values to the end of the bitmap file. If present, a reader can use it to match bitmapped and non-bitmapped names during delta compression. Here are perf results for p5310: Test origin/master HEAD^ HEAD ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5310.2: repack to disk 36.81(37.82+1.43) 47.70(48.74+1.41) +29.6% 47.75(48.70+1.51) +29.7% 5310.3: simulated clone 30.78(29.70+2.14) 1.08(0.97+0.10) -96.5% 1.07(0.94+0.12) -96.5% 5310.4: simulated fetch 3.16(6.10+0.08) 3.54(10.65+0.06) +12.0% 1.70(3.07+0.06) -46.2% 5310.6: partial bitmap 36.76(43.19+1.81) 6.71(11.25+0.76) -81.7% 4.08(6.26+0.46) -88.9% You can see that the time spent on an incremental fetch goes down, as our delta heuristics are able to do their work. And we save time on the partial bitmap clone for the same reason. Signed-off-by: Vicent Marti <tanoku@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
2013-12-30t/perf: add tests for pack bitmapsLibravatar Jeff King1-0/+56
This adds a few basic perf tests for the pack bitmap code to show off its improvements. The tests are: 1. How long does it take to do a repack (it gets slower with bitmaps, since we have to do extra work)? 2. How long does it take to do a clone (it gets faster with bitmaps)? 3. How does a small fetch perform when we've just repacked? 4. How does a clone perform when we haven't repacked since a week of pushes? Here are results against linux.git: Test origin/master this tree ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 5310.2: repack to disk 33.64(32.64+2.04) 67.67(66.75+1.84) +101.2% 5310.3: simulated clone 30.49(29.47+2.05) 1.20(1.10+0.10) -96.1% 5310.4: simulated fetch 3.49(6.79+0.06) 5.57(22.35+0.07) +59.6% 5310.6: partial bitmap 36.70(43.87+1.81) 8.18(21.92+0.73) -77.7% You can see that we do take longer to repack, but we do way better for further clones. A small fetch performs a bit worse, as we spend way more time on delta compression (note the heavy user CPU time, as we have 8 threads) due to the lack of name hashes for the bitmapped objects. The final test shows how the bitmaps degrade over time between packs. There's still a significant speedup over the non-bitmap case, but we don't do quite as well (we have to spend time accessing the "new" objects the old fashioned way, including delta compression). Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net> Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>