[tahoe-dev] Tahoe-LAFS v1.8.0 potentially delayed by performance issue

[Wayne Scott]

Does it matter what version the machine in the cluster are running?

-Wayne

On Fri, Aug 13, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Zooko O'Whielacronx <zooko at zooko.com>wrote:

> Folks:
>
> It seems like Tahoe-LAFS v1.8.0c2 downloads this movie file:
>
>
> http://127.0.0.1:3456/file/URI%3ACHK%3A4klgnafrwsm2nx3bqy24ygac5a%3Acrz7nhthi4bevzrug6xwgif2vhiacp7wk2cfmjutoz2ns3w45qza%3A3%3A10%3A1490710513/@@named=/bbb-360p24.i420.lossless.drc.ogg.fixed.ogg%2Bbbb-24fps.flac.via-ffmpeg.ogg
>
> About 1/3 as fast as Tahoe-LAFS v1.7.1 downloads the same file from
> the same grid (the public Test Grid circa today).
>
> We're investigating (see ticket #1170 for our progress) and we might
> delay the final release of Tahoe-LAFS v1.8.0 (previously planned for
> August 15 -- this Sunday). This might turn out to require a patch
> added on top of Tahoe-LAFS v1.8.0c2 to make it so it isn't such a
> significant performance regression in this case. Or it might turn out
> that this is a really peculiar situation which will almost never occur
> for any other user and we'll decide to release v1.8.0c2 as v1.8.0
> final.
>
> If you care about immutable download performance, please compare
> v1.8.0c2 to v1.7.1 on your network with your files! And report your
> results to this list. Nathan Eisenberg has done so [1], and shown that
> v1.8.0c1 was substantially *faster* than v1.7.1 for his tests. (Note
> that 1.8.0c1 and 1.8.0c2 are identical with regard to immutable file
> download speed.) Earlier Kyle Markley did some benchmarking of v1.7.1
> [2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9], but nobody has yet replicated his experiment
> using v1.8.0c2. I have done quite a bit of benchmarking this one
> particular file from my office (SimpleGeo) and home, and my results
> are all on #1170.
>
> Regards,
>
> Zooko
>
> [1] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-August/004930.html
> [2] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-July/004776.html
> [3] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-July/004781.html
> [4] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-July/004782.html
> [5] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-July/004786.html
> [6] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-July/004811.html
> [7] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-July/004808.html
> [8] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-July/004838.html
> [9] http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/2010-August/004853.html
>
> http://tahoe-lafs.org/trac/tahoe-lafs/ticket/1170# does new-downloader
> perform badly for certain situations (such as today's Test Grid)?
> _______________________________________________
> tahoe-dev mailing list
> tahoe-dev at tahoe-lafs.org
> http://tahoe-lafs.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tahoe-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://tahoe-lafs.org/pipermail/tahoe-dev/attachments/20100813/dac824ef/attachment.html>