Skip to content

Conversation

@johnsonw
Copy link
Contributor

@johnsonw johnsonw commented Sep 2, 2025

  • Change the scrape benchmark to use http requests and the same app that
    we are using in the service. This will make the benchmark closer to
    what we are doing in real life. This also takes into account gzip
    compression and other small details.

@johnsonw johnsonw self-assigned this Sep 2, 2025
@johnsonw johnsonw added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 2, 2025
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 2, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.78%. Comparing base (0a1b9e4) to head (4a496fb).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #109   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.78%   93.78%           
=======================================
  Files          44       44           
  Lines        5435     5435           
  Branches     5435     5435           
=======================================
  Hits         5097     5097           
  Misses        269      269           
  Partials       69       69           
Flag Coverage Δ
2_14_0_ddn133 34.46% <ø> (ø)
2_14_0_ddn145 35.46% <ø> (ø)
all-tests 93.78% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 2, 2025

🐰 Bencher Report

Branchjohnsonw/scrape-metrics-update
Testbedci-runner
Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkLatencyBenchmark Result
milliseconds (ms)
(Result Δ%)
Lower Boundary
milliseconds (ms)
(Limit %)
Upper Boundary
milliseconds (ms)
(Limit %)
jobstats 100📈 view plot
🚷 view threshold
1.49 ms
(-0.15%)Baseline: 1.49 ms
1.46 ms
(98.08%)
1.52 ms
(97.83%)
jobstats 1000📈 view plot
🚷 view threshold
14.44 ms
(-0.93%)Baseline: 14.58 ms
14.18 ms
(98.17%)
14.98 ms
(96.42%)
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 2, 2025

🐰 Bencher Report

Branchjohnsonw/scrape-metrics-update
Testbedci-runner

⚠️ WARNING: No Threshold found!

Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated.

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
BenchmarkD1 Miss Ratemisses (%)D1mrmisses (reads) x 1e3D1mwmisses (writes) x 1e3DLmrmisses (reads)DLmwmisses (writes) x 1e3Drreads x 1e6Dwwrites x 1e6Estimated Cyclescycles x 1e6I1 Miss Ratemisses (%)I1mrmisses (reads) x 1e3ILmrmisses (reads)InstructionsBenchmark Result
instructions x 1e6
(Result Δ%)
Lower Boundary
instructions x 1e6
(Limit %)
Upper Boundary
instructions x 1e6
(Limit %)
L1 Hit Ratehits (%)L1 Hitshits x 1e6LL Hit Ratehits (%)LL Hitshits x 1e3LL Miss Ratemisses (%)LLd Miss Ratemisses (%)LLi Miss Ratemisses (%)RAM Hit Ratehits (%)RAM Hitshits x 1e3Total read+writereads/writes x 1e6
lustre_metrics::memory_benches::bench_encode_lustre_metrics with_setup:generate_records()📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
0.91 %📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
24.89 reads x 1e3📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
8.87 writes x 1e3📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
106.00 reads📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
6.53 writes x 1e3📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
2.48 x 1e6📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1.23 x 1e6📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
14.85 x 1e6📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
0.01 %📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1.01 reads x 1e3📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
858.00 reads📈 view plot
🚷 view threshold
10.77 x 1e6
(-44.00%)Baseline: 19.24 x 1e6
3.04 x 1e6
(28.18%)
35.44 x 1e6
(30.40%)
📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
99.76 %📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
14.46 x 1e6📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
0.19 %📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
27.27 x 1e3📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
0.05 %📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
0.18 %📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
0.01 %📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
0.05 %📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
7.50 x 1e3📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
14.49 x 1e6
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Sep 2, 2025

🐰 Bencher Report

Branchjohnsonw/scrape-metrics-update
Testbedci-runner

⚠️ WARNING: No Threshold found!

Without a Threshold, no Alerts will ever be generated.

Click here to create a new Threshold
For more information, see the Threshold documentation.
To only post results if a Threshold exists, set the --ci-only-thresholds flag.

Click to view all benchmark results
Benchmarkavg_runtime_rss_mibMeasure (MiB)avg_runtime_virtual_mibMeasure (MiB)end_rss_mibMeasure (MiB)end_virtual_mibMeasure (MiB)memory_growth_mibMeasure (MiB)peak_over_start_rss_ratioMeasure (units)peak_over_start_virtual_ratioMeasure (units)peak_rss_mibBenchmark Result
Measure (MiB)
(Result Δ%)
Lower Boundary
Measure (MiB)
(Limit %)
Upper Boundary
Measure (MiB)
(Limit %)
peak_virtual_mibMeasure (MiB)start_rss_mibMeasure (MiB)start_virtual_mibMeasure (MiB)virtual_growth_mibMeasure (MiB)
scrape_allocations📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
45.02 MiB📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
876.00 MiB📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
45.10 MiB📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
876.11 MiB📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
0.34 MiB📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1.03 units📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
1.02 units📈 view plot
🚷 view threshold
46.80 MiB
(-68.46%)Baseline: 148.37 MiB
-225.48 MiB
(-481.79%)
522.22 MiB
(8.96%)
📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
878.79 MiB📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
44.75 MiB📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
870.75 MiB📈 view plot
⚠️ NO THRESHOLD
5.35 MiB
🐰 View full continuous benchmarking report in Bencher

@johnsonw johnsonw force-pushed the johnsonw/scrape-metrics-update branch 24 times, most recently from 4e7ec64 to e3ff12d Compare September 7, 2025 04:32
@johnsonw johnsonw force-pushed the johnsonw/scrape-metrics-update branch 4 times, most recently from b235140 to a0ed37b Compare September 8, 2025 11:53
@jgrund
Copy link
Contributor

jgrund commented Sep 11, 2025

@johnsonw State of this?

  we are using in the service. This will make the benchmark closer to
  what we are doing in real life. This also takes into account gzip
  compression and other small details.

Signed-off-by: William Johnson <[email protected]>
@johnsonw johnsonw force-pushed the johnsonw/scrape-metrics-update branch from a0ed37b to 4a496fb Compare September 11, 2025 21:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants