Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 2297770.1591798420@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm (Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm
Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm Re: Recording test runtimes with the buildfarm |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Andrew Dunstan <andrew.dunstan@2ndquadrant.com> writes: > Alternatively, people with access to the database could extract the logs > and post-process them using perl or python. That would involve no work > on my part :-) But it would not be automated. Yeah, we could easily extract per-test-script runtimes, since pg_regress started to print those. But ... > What we do record (in build_status_log) is the time each step took. So > any regression test that suddenly blew out should likewise cause a > blowout in the time the whole "make check" took. I have in the past scraped the latter results and tried to make sense of them. They are *mighty* noisy, even when considering just one animal that I know to be running on a machine with little else to do. Maybe averaging across the whole buildfarm could reduce the noise level, but I'm not very hopeful. Per-test-script times would likely be even noisier (ISTM anyway, maybe I'm wrong). The entire reason we've been discussing a separate performance farm is the expectation that buildfarm timings will be too noisy to be useful to detect any but the most obvious performance effects. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: