EM::Completion performance vs EM::Deferrable

[AE9RB]

I saw EM::Completion arrive as a new feature and tested it out. On the following benchmark I perform 75000 queries to a database server. Yes, more than 50k/sec, not a typo! EM::Deferrable appears twice as fast.

                user     system      total        real
Deferrable  1.390000   0.080000   1.470000 (  1.465720)
Completion  3.170000   0.120000   3.290000 (  3.372402)

The following commit supports EM::Completion. It is not supported in any other commit.
https://github.com/dturnbull/ruby-redis/tree/8d6485c161993
You can run test/bench.rb to reproduce.

[raggi]

The price you pay for thread safety.

Although this is likely use case bound, there may be some available options for optimization.

On Jul 31, 2011, at 3:10 PM, dturnbull wrote:

I saw EM::Completion arrive as a new feature and tested it out. On the following benchmark I perform 75000 queries to a database server. Yes, more than 50k/sec, not a typo! EM::Deferrable appears twice as fast.

               user     system      total        real
Deferrable  1.390000   0.080000   1.470000 (  1.465720)
Completion  3.170000   0.120000   3.290000 (  3.372402)

The following commit supports EM::Completion. It is not supported in any other commit.
https://github.com/dturnbull/ruby-redis/tree/8d6485c161993
You can run test/bench.rb to reproduce.

Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
#231

[AE9RB]

I looked deeper into this. I think half is from EM.schedule and the other half from extra work succeeding a request. It's probably not a big deal for most, but I was wondering what your plans for Deferrable are now.