-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 97
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
Added: support for timeout_scope #153
Conversation
"smoke" performance test - using 10 (simple) always failing patterns :
baseline
|
Great stuff @kares - left a naming suggestion comment. I really like the TimeoutSupport abstraction. |
based on (above smoke test) numbers - surprisingly the current code does get (~5%) slower for the |
btw I used https://gist.github.com/jsvd/23dbb156904e9ba770d48bb971b6735e#file-gistfile1-txt |
yy - more patterns more it should improve ... that part I am happy with 🥇 |
I have tested with a single pattern using https://gist.github.com/jsvd/23dbb156904e9ba770d48bb971b6735e#file-stress_single_pattern |
~5% degradation mostly impacts |
this is motivated by reduced performance for the default case since JRuby does not yet inline blocks the additional 'dummy' block passing (due timeout) had a small impact on performance.
with some "oop" (to avoid dummy block passes) - smoke performance now shows close to base line. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good work on getting eliminating overhead from the baseline case, and this should certainly improve the performance issues we saw with many-pattrrn fall-through 🎉
I've left a few comments, mostly just things that can be cleaned up after your latest refactor.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM pending doc review.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I made a couple of comments as suggestions in line.
Please add an entry to the configuration options table around line 199.
Thanks for this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Docs build cleanly and LGTM. Thanks!
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One last thing, I promise.
Other than the changelog version mismatch, this LGTM. Feel free to resolve that and merge/publish.
Co-Authored-By: Ry Biesemeyer <yaauie@users.noreply.github.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM 🙌🏼
this is motivated by reduced performance for the default case since JRuby does not yet inline blocks the additional 'dummy' block passing (due timeout) had a small impact on performance. Fixes #153
Co-Authored-By: Ry Biesemeyer <yaauie@users.noreply.github.com> Fixes #153
a follow-up on logstash-pluginsGH-153
a follow-up on logstash-pluginsGH-153
this is a new feature (off by default) meant to reduce the high cost of timeouts (follow-up on #147)
an attempt to address: #152
some things left to wrap this one up:
timeout_grouped
sound okay?eventually a performance test guard (could be added later).