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

geyser: wrap messages in Arc #449

Closed
wants to merge 52 commits into from
Closed

geyser: wrap messages in Arc #449

wants to merge 52 commits into from

Conversation

fanatid
Copy link
Collaborator

@fanatid fanatid commented Nov 5, 2024

No description provided.

@fanatid fanatid marked this pull request as draft November 5, 2024 20:30
@fanatid
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fanatid commented Nov 9, 2024

benchmark:

accounts/ref            time:   [14.624 ms 15.003 ms 15.448 ms]
                        change: [-4.6751% -0.8189% +2.9899%] (p = 0.69 > 0.05)
                        No change in performance detected.
Found 14 outliers among 100 measurements (14.00%)
  6 (6.00%) high mild
  8 (8.00%) high severe

accounts/prost          time:   [26.237 ms 26.899 ms 27.687 ms]
                        change: [-6.0325% -2.4645% +1.6056%] (p = 0.21 > 0.05)
                        No change in performance detected.
Found 14 outliers among 100 measurements (14.00%)
  7 (7.00%) high mild
  7 (7.00%) high severe

accounts/prost clone    time:   [33.759 ms 34.480 ms 35.326 ms]
Found 10 outliers among 100 measurements (10.00%)
  2 (2.00%) high mild
  8 (8.00%) high severe

transactions/ref        time:   [84.448 µs 86.141 µs 88.175 µs]
                        change: [-5.9081% -3.3280% -0.8504%] (p = 0.01 < 0.05)
                        Change within noise threshold.
Found 20 outliers among 100 measurements (20.00%)
  6 (6.00%) low mild
  4 (4.00%) high mild
  10 (10.00%) high severe

transactions/prost      time:   [220.35 µs 225.02 µs 230.68 µs]
                        change: [-2.3180% +1.5346% +5.6245%] (p = 0.45 > 0.05)
                        No change in performance detected.
Found 12 outliers among 100 measurements (12.00%)
  2 (2.00%) low mild
  1 (1.00%) high mild
  9 (9.00%) high severe

transactions/prost clone
                        time:   [226.24 µs 231.22 µs 237.29 µs]
                        change: [-1.2639% +1.6528% +4.8923%] (p = 0.31 > 0.05)
                        No change in performance detected.
Found 10 outliers among 100 measurements (10.00%)
  1 (1.00%) low mild
  9 (9.00%) high severe

Benchmarking blocks/ref: Warming up for 3.0000 s
Warning: Unable to complete 100 samples in 5.0s. You may wish to increase target time to 15.7s, or reduce sample count to 30.
blocks/ref              time:   [153.60 ms 155.80 ms 158.21 ms]
                        change: [-1.7113% +0.3508% +2.3395%] (p = 0.75 > 0.05)
                        No change in performance detected.
Found 19 outliers among 100 measurements (19.00%)
  1 (1.00%) high mild
  18 (18.00%) high severe

Benchmarking blocks/prost: Warming up for 3.0000 s
Warning: Unable to complete 100 samples in 5.0s. You may wish to increase target time to 30.8s, or reduce sample count to 10.
blocks/prost            time:   [305.61 ms 308.53 ms 311.57 ms]
                        change: [-3.8054% -2.5197% -1.2056%] (p = 0.00 < 0.05)
                        Performance has improved.

Benchmarking blocks/prost clone: Warming up for 3.0000 s
Warning: Unable to complete 100 samples in 5.0s. You may wish to increase target time to 29.3s, or reduce sample count to 10.
blocks/prost clone      time:   [291.08 ms 293.96 ms 297.00 ms]
                        change: [-1.9567% -0.5771% +0.8371%] (p = 0.43 > 0.05)
                        No change in performance detected.

@fanatid fanatid marked this pull request as ready for review November 9, 2024 21:44
@lvboudre
Copy link
Contributor

I don't see unit test for the new code.

In fumarole I use yellowstone-grpc-geyser and proto, will this changes break my code?

@fanatid
Copy link
Collaborator Author

fanatid commented Nov 13, 2024

I don't see unit test for the new code.

do you mean encoding? tests in message_ref.rs

In fumarole I use yellowstone-grpc-geyser and proto, will this changes break my code?

proto crate should not introduce any breaking changes, only new features
geyser crate is not for public usage, what do you use?

@lvboudre
Copy link
Contributor

I don't see unit test for the new code.

do you mean encoding? tests in message_ref.rs

In fumarole I use yellowstone-grpc-geyser and proto, will this changes break my code?

proto crate should not introduce any breaking changes, only new features geyser crate is not for public usage, what do you use?

My bad, github collapsed your message_ref.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants