Skip to content
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

Delay benchmark runs if the machine is active #272

Closed
kayceesrk opened this issue Jan 10, 2022 · 6 comments · Fixed by #317
Closed

Delay benchmark runs if the machine is active #272

kayceesrk opened this issue Jan 10, 2022 · 6 comments · Fixed by #317
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers

Comments

@kayceesrk
Copy link
Contributor

If the machine running the benchmarks is actively being used, there's no point running the benchmarks as all the results would be sabotaged. Consider implementing something similar to this to delay benchmark start.

@kayceesrk kayceesrk added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 10, 2022
@shakthimaan shakthimaan self-assigned this Feb 9, 2022
@Sudha247 Sudha247 added the good first issue Good for newcomers label Mar 28, 2022
@moazzammoriani
Copy link
Contributor

@Sudha247 may I work on this?

@Sudha247
Copy link
Contributor

Sure, you can go ahead and work on this. Feel free to post here if you have any questions.

@moazzammoriani
Copy link
Contributor

From what I understand, what @kayceesrk means is that if a benchmark is being run on a machine that does not have all / most of its resources dedicated to the program being benchmarked then is not a fair benchmark?

@kayceesrk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not exactly. What the linked snippet (https://github.com/kayceesrk/ocamlbench-scripts/blob/master/run-bench.sh#L211-L227) in the original message tests for is the loadavg in the past 1 min on the machine. If it is more than 0.6, then the script delays the start of the benchmarking by 5 minutes and tries again. Does that help?

@moazzammoriani
Copy link
Contributor

I think. Why specifically something like 0.6 though if you don't mind if I ask? Just because it'd be a good heuristic that would increase the likelihood that the machine gets enough resources to run the benchmarks?

@kayceesrk
Copy link
Contributor Author

Why specifically something like 0.6 though if you don't mind if I ask?

Trial and error. 0.6 just seemed to do the trick.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants