aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/src/bench/gcs_filter.cpp
AgeCommit message (Collapse)Author
10 daysbench: [refactor] iwyuMarcoFalke
2023-02-01Fix clang-tidy readability-const-return-type violationsMarcoFalke
2022-12-24scripted-diff: Bump copyright headersHennadii Stepanov
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT- ./contrib/devtools/copyright_header.py update ./ -END VERIFY SCRIPT- Commits of previous years: - 2021: f47dda2c58b5d8d623e0e7ff4e74bc352dfa83d7 - 2020: fa0074e2d82928016a43ca408717154a1c70a4db - 2019: aaaaad6ac95b402fe18d019d67897ced6b316ee0
2022-10-20bench: explicitly make all current benchmarks "high" priorityfurszy
no-functional changes. Only have set the priority level explicitly on every BENCHMARK macro call.
2022-05-22Update GCSFilter benchmarksCalvin Kim
Element count used in the GCSFilter benchmarks are increased to 100,000 from 10,000. Testing the benchmarks with different element counts showed that a filter with 100,000 elements resulted in the same ns/op. This this a desirable thing to have as it allows us to reason about how long a single filter element takes to process, letting us easily calculate how long a filter with N elements (where N > 100,000) would take to process. GCSFilterConstruct benchmark is now called without batch. This makes intra-bench results more intuitive as all benchmarks are in ns/op instead of a custom unit. There are no downsides to this change as testing showed that there is no observable difference in error rates in the benchmarks when calling without batch.
2022-05-22Add GCSFilterDecodeSkipCheck benchmarkPatrick Strateman
This benchmark allows us to compare the differences between doing the sanity check for corruption via GolombRiceDecode() vs checking the hash of the encoded block filter.
2022-05-22Add GCSFilterDecode and GCSBlockFilterGetHash benchmarks.Patrick Strateman
All of the benchmarks are standardized on the BASIC filter parameters so we can compare between all the benchmarks. All the GCS benchmarks are renamed to have "GCS" as the prefix.
2020-12-31scripted-diff: Bump copyright headersMarcoFalke
-BEGIN VERIFY SCRIPT- ./contrib/devtools/copyright_header.py update ./ -END VERIFY SCRIPT-
2020-06-13Replace current benchmarking framework with nanobenchMartin Ankerl
This replaces the current benchmarking framework with nanobench [1], an MIT licensed single-header benchmarking library, of which I am the autor. This has in my opinion several advantages, especially on Linux: * fast: Running all benchmarks takes ~6 seconds instead of 4m13s on an Intel i7-8700 CPU @ 3.20GHz. * accurate: I ran e.g. the benchmark for SipHash_32b 10 times and calculate standard deviation / mean = coefficient of variation: * 0.57% CV for old benchmarking framework * 0.20% CV for nanobench So the benchmark results with nanobench seem to vary less than with the old framework. * It automatically determines runtime based on clock precision, no need to specify number of evaluations. * measure instructions, cycles, branches, instructions per cycle, branch misses (only Linux, when performance counters are available) * output in markdown table format. * Warn about unstable environment (frequency scaling, turbo, ...) * For better profiling, it is possible to set the environment variable NANOBENCH_ENDLESS to force endless running of a particular benchmark without the need to recompile. This makes it to e.g. run "perf top" and look at hotspots. Here is an example copy & pasted from the terminal output: | ns/byte | byte/s | err% | ins/byte | cyc/byte | IPC | bra/byte | miss% | total | benchmark |--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|---------------:|--------:|----------:|:---------- | 2.52 | 396,529,415.94 | 0.6% | 25.42 | 8.02 | 3.169 | 0.06 | 0.0% | 0.03 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp RIPEMD160` | 1.87 | 535,161,444.83 | 0.3% | 21.36 | 5.95 | 3.589 | 0.06 | 0.0% | 0.02 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA1` | 3.22 | 310,344,174.79 | 1.1% | 36.80 | 10.22 | 3.601 | 0.09 | 0.0% | 0.04 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256` | 2.01 | 496,375,796.23 | 0.0% | 18.72 | 6.43 | 2.911 | 0.01 | 1.0% | 0.00 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256D64_1024` | 7.23 | 138,263,519.35 | 0.1% | 82.66 | 23.11 | 3.577 | 1.63 | 0.1% | 0.00 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA256_32b` | 3.04 | 328,780,166.40 | 0.3% | 35.82 | 9.69 | 3.696 | 0.03 | 0.0% | 0.03 | `bench/crypto_hash.cpp SHA512` [1] https://github.com/martinus/nanobench * Adds support for asymptotes This adds support to calculate asymptotic complexity of a benchmark. This is similar to #17375, but currently only one asymptote is supported, and I have added support in the benchmark `ComplexMemPool` as an example. Usage is e.g. like this: ``` ./bench_bitcoin -filter=ComplexMemPool -asymptote=25,50,100,200,400,600,800 ``` This runs the benchmark `ComplexMemPool` several times but with different complexityN settings. The benchmark can extract that number and use it accordingly. Here, it's used for `childTxs`. The output is this: | complexityN | ns/op | op/s | err% | ins/op | cyc/op | IPC | total | benchmark |------------:|--------------------:|--------------------:|--------:|----------------:|----------------:|-------:|----------:|:---------- | 25 | 1,064,241.00 | 939.64 | 1.4% | 3,960,279.00 | 2,829,708.00 | 1.400 | 0.01 | `ComplexMemPool` | 50 | 1,579,530.00 | 633.10 | 1.0% | 6,231,810.00 | 4,412,674.00 | 1.412 | 0.02 | `ComplexMemPool` | 100 | 4,022,774.00 | 248.58 | 0.6% | 16,544,406.00 | 11,889,535.00 | 1.392 | 0.04 | `ComplexMemPool` | 200 | 15,390,986.00 | 64.97 | 0.2% | 63,904,254.00 | 47,731,705.00 | 1.339 | 0.17 | `ComplexMemPool` | 400 | 69,394,711.00 | 14.41 | 0.1% | 272,602,461.00 | 219,014,691.00 | 1.245 | 0.76 | `ComplexMemPool` | 600 | 168,977,165.00 | 5.92 | 0.1% | 639,108,082.00 | 535,316,887.00 | 1.194 | 1.86 | `ComplexMemPool` | 800 | 310,109,077.00 | 3.22 | 0.1% |1,149,134,246.00 | 984,620,812.00 | 1.167 | 3.41 | `ComplexMemPool` | coefficient | err% | complexity |--------------:|-------:|------------ | 4.78486e-07 | 4.5% | O(n^2) | 6.38557e-10 | 21.7% | O(n^3) | 3.42338e-05 | 38.0% | O(n log n) | 0.000313914 | 46.9% | O(n) | 0.0129823 | 114.4% | O(log n) | 0.0815055 | 133.8% | O(1) The best fitting curve is O(n^2), so the algorithm seems to scale quadratic with `childTxs` in the range 25 to 800.
2018-11-06blockfilter: Refactor GCS params into struct.Jim Posen
2018-08-25bench: Benchmark GCS filter creation and matching.Jim Posen