ODIn/spark-instrumented-optimizer
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity
spark-instrumented-optimizer/core/benchmarks/KryoBenchmark-jdk11-results.txt

29 lines
2.8 KiB
Plaintext
Raw Normal View History

[SPARK-29192][TESTS] Extend BenchmarkBase to write JDK9+ results separately ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to extend the existing benchmarks to save JDK9+ result separately. All `core` module benchmark test results are added. I'll run the other test suites in another PR. After regenerating all results, we will check JDK11 performance regressions. ### Why are the changes needed? From Apache Spark 3.0, we support both JDK8 and JDK11. We need to have a way to find the performance regression. ### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? Manually run the benchmark. Closes #25873 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-JDK11-PERF. Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com>
2019-09-20 22:41:25 -04:00
================================================================================================
Benchmark Kryo Unsafe vs safe Serialization
================================================================================================
[SPARK-34950][TESTS] Update benchmark results to the ones created by GitHub Actions machines ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/32015 added a way to run benchmarks much more easily in the same GitHub Actions build. This PR updates the benchmark results by using the way. **NOTE** that looks like GitHub Actions use four types of CPU given my observations: - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8171M CPU 2.60GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v4 2.30GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v3 2.40GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU 2.60GHz Given my quick research, seems like they perform roughly similarly: ![Screen Shot 2021-04-03 at 9 31 23 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/6477701/113478478-f4b57b80-94c3-11eb-9047-f81ca8c59672.png) I couldn't find enough information about Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU 2.60GHz but the performance seems roughly similar given the numbers. So shouldn't be a big deal especially given that this way is much easier, encourages contributors to run more and guarantee the same number of cores and same memory with the same softwares. ### Why are the changes needed? To have a base line of the benchmarks accordingly. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No, dev-only. ### How was this patch tested? It was generated from: - [Run benchmarks: * (JDK 11)](https://github.com/HyukjinKwon/spark/actions/runs/713575465) - [Run benchmarks: * (JDK 8)](https://github.com/HyukjinKwon/spark/actions/runs/713154337) Closes #32044 from HyukjinKwon/SPARK-34950. Authored-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Max Gekk <max.gekk@gmail.com>
2021-04-03 16:02:56 -04:00
OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM 11.0.10+9-LTS on Linux 5.4.0-1043-azure
Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v4 @ 2.30GHz
[SPARK-29192][TESTS] Extend BenchmarkBase to write JDK9+ results separately ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to extend the existing benchmarks to save JDK9+ result separately. All `core` module benchmark test results are added. I'll run the other test suites in another PR. After regenerating all results, we will check JDK11 performance regressions. ### Why are the changes needed? From Apache Spark 3.0, we support both JDK8 and JDK11. We need to have a way to find the performance regression. ### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? Manually run the benchmark. Closes #25873 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-JDK11-PERF. Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com>
2019-09-20 22:41:25 -04:00
Benchmark Kryo Unsafe vs safe Serialization: Best Time(ms) Avg Time(ms) Stdev(ms) Rate(M/s) Per Row(ns) Relative
[SPARK-34950][TESTS] Update benchmark results to the ones created by GitHub Actions machines ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? https://github.com/apache/spark/pull/32015 added a way to run benchmarks much more easily in the same GitHub Actions build. This PR updates the benchmark results by using the way. **NOTE** that looks like GitHub Actions use four types of CPU given my observations: - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8171M CPU 2.60GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v4 2.30GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) CPU E5-2673 v3 2.40GHz - Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU 2.60GHz Given my quick research, seems like they perform roughly similarly: ![Screen Shot 2021-04-03 at 9 31 23 PM](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/6477701/113478478-f4b57b80-94c3-11eb-9047-f81ca8c59672.png) I couldn't find enough information about Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8272CL CPU 2.60GHz but the performance seems roughly similar given the numbers. So shouldn't be a big deal especially given that this way is much easier, encourages contributors to run more and guarantee the same number of cores and same memory with the same softwares. ### Why are the changes needed? To have a base line of the benchmarks accordingly. ### Does this PR introduce _any_ user-facing change? No, dev-only. ### How was this patch tested? It was generated from: - [Run benchmarks: * (JDK 11)](https://github.com/HyukjinKwon/spark/actions/runs/713575465) - [Run benchmarks: * (JDK 8)](https://github.com/HyukjinKwon/spark/actions/runs/713154337) Closes #32044 from HyukjinKwon/SPARK-34950. Authored-by: HyukjinKwon <gurwls223@apache.org> Signed-off-by: Max Gekk <max.gekk@gmail.com>
2021-04-03 16:02:56 -04:00
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
basicTypes: Int with unsafe:true 331 346 11 3.0 330.7 1.0X
basicTypes: Long with unsafe:true 392 401 9 2.6 392.0 0.8X
basicTypes: Float with unsafe:true 394 404 9 2.5 394.5 0.8X
basicTypes: Double with unsafe:true 404 414 7 2.5 404.0 0.8X
Array: Int with unsafe:true 5 6 1 195.3 5.1 64.6X
Array: Long with unsafe:true 8 9 1 124.1 8.1 41.0X
Array: Float with unsafe:true 5 6 1 186.1 5.4 61.5X
Array: Double with unsafe:true 8 9 1 126.1 7.9 41.7X
Map of string->Double with unsafe:true 54 59 4 18.4 54.4 6.1X
basicTypes: Int with unsafe:false 417 428 8 2.4 416.6 0.8X
basicTypes: Long with unsafe:false 452 466 9 2.2 451.8 0.7X
basicTypes: Float with unsafe:false 410 421 6 2.4 410.0 0.8X
basicTypes: Double with unsafe:false 429 444 10 2.3 429.2 0.8X
Array: Int with unsafe:false 25 27 2 39.2 25.5 13.0X
Array: Long with unsafe:false 40 43 2 25.0 40.0 8.3X
Array: Float with unsafe:false 11 12 1 90.7 11.0 30.0X
Array: Double with unsafe:false 18 20 1 54.2 18.5 17.9X
Map of string->Double with unsafe:false 55 59 2 18.0 55.5 6.0X
[SPARK-29192][TESTS] Extend BenchmarkBase to write JDK9+ results separately ### What changes were proposed in this pull request? This PR aims to extend the existing benchmarks to save JDK9+ result separately. All `core` module benchmark test results are added. I'll run the other test suites in another PR. After regenerating all results, we will check JDK11 performance regressions. ### Why are the changes needed? From Apache Spark 3.0, we support both JDK8 and JDK11. We need to have a way to find the performance regression. ### Does this PR introduce any user-facing change? No. ### How was this patch tested? Manually run the benchmark. Closes #25873 from dongjoon-hyun/SPARK-JDK11-PERF. Authored-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com> Signed-off-by: Dongjoon Hyun <dhyun@apple.com>
2019-09-20 22:41:25 -04:00
Reference in a new issue Copy permalink