You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Hello, this is more a question than an issue but there is nothing related to the performance overhead added by vernier on a ruby program, did someone made a benchmark or something like that already ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
It's hard to give a specific number, since there are a variety of factors. Vernier is a sampling profiler so we expect the overhead to be very low (and based on the sample rate set).
I did commit examples/measure_overhead.rb the first test of which shows that as expected there is almost no overhead:
$ ruby 3.3.0 (2023-12-25 revision 5124f9ac75) [x86_64-linux]
Warming up --------------------------------------
no profiler 737.000 i/100ms
vernier 725.000 i/100ms
Calculating -------------------------------------
no profiler 7.374k (± 0.4%) i/s - 37.587k in 5.096970s
vernier 7.275k (± 0.2%) i/s - 36.975k in 5.082242s
Comparison:
no profiler: 7374.5 i/s
vernier: 7275.4 i/s - 1.01x slower
The other tests in that file show that there is overhead associated with the optional allocation_sample_rate tracing (partly because that makes the VM take a slow path, partly just because of the cost to record the samples).
I'll leave this open as a reminder that I want to mention something in the README
jhawthorn
changed the title
Impact on performances ?
README should mention low overhead
Apr 21, 2024
Hello, this is more a question than an issue but there is nothing related to the performance overhead added by vernier on a ruby program, did someone made a benchmark or something like that already ?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: