-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 649
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.
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
Introduce benchmarking for PRs #739
Comments
Thanks @ivanvc for raising this issue. Please see my response below,
For the writing test, I think we should commit the TXN at least multiple times, i.e 10 times. So options.Iterations/options.BatchSize > 10. For the options.BatchSize, it should be big enough, i.e. at least 10K.
We can add it on github action firstlyh. Eventually we may want to migrate all workflow checks to Prow.
It may not be a urgent task. |
Is it any reason to move workflow to Prow? |
It's part of the effort of kubernetes/k8s.io#6102. At least the Prow has more powerful machine, we can have shorter running time for the performance test. Please see #691 |
I was thinking that github action can provide VM which supports nested virtualization and we can simulate real power-failure. And it's more easy to debug CI changes in GitHub action. Just my two cents. Anyway, thanks for sharing the background. |
Yes, it's a good point. etcd is actually sequentially writing the keys. We need to consider different write modes and read modes, also different key & value sizes. Usually K8s's value size is bigger than 1K+? Could you draft a simple doc |
Formalizing the comment from PR #691 (comment). Adding a GitHub action or Prow Job to compare benchmarks vs.
main
would help catch issues sooner, like the one tracked in #720.@ahrtr, a couple of questions to finalize scoping this task:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: