+Received: from sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com ([172.29.43.191]

+ helo=mx.sourceforge.net)

+ by sfs-ml-2.v29.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtp (Exim 4.76)

+ (envelope-from <joel.kaartinen@gmail.com>) id 1TJiA4-0000Bs-MG

+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;

+ Thu, 04 Oct 2012 09:56:08 +0000

+Received-SPF: pass (sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com: domain of gmail.com

+ designates 209.85.217.175 as permitted sender)

+ client-ip=209.85.217.175; envelope-from=joel.kaartinen@gmail.com;

+ helo=mail-lb0-f175.google.com;

+Received: from mail-lb0-f175.google.com ([209.85.217.175])

+ by sog-mx-1.v43.ch3.sourceforge.com with esmtps (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128)

+ (Exim 4.76) id 1TJi9z-0003uG-8q

+ for bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net;

+ Thu, 04 Oct 2012 09:56:08 +0000

+Received: by mail-lb0-f175.google.com with SMTP id y2so183235lbk.34

+ for <bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>;

+ Thu, 04 Oct 2012 02:55:56 -0700 (PDT)

+Received: by 10.112.37.105 with SMTP id x9mr2518732lbj.69.1349344556496;

+ Thu, 04 Oct 2012 02:55:56 -0700 (PDT)

+Received: from [86.50.113.68] (dyn79-324.yok.fi. [86.50.113.68])

+ by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id ml11sm2088622lab.14.2012.10.04.02.55.54

+ (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 04 Oct 2012 02:55:55 -0700 (PDT)

+Message-ID: <1349344554.31175.6.camel@mei>

+From: Joel Joonatan Kaartinen <joel.kaartinen@gmail.com>

+To: Ian Miers <imiers1@jhu.edu>

+Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 12:55:54 +0300

+In-Reply-To: <CAEC9zAZR7xOUEJZz0f-Of0HTVAcL8uCw3tcR1s66Hg_kZbczRg@mail.gmail.com>

+References: <CAEC9zAbHO9y7Go4FhZFyOCKdm1js_eKCoz7iaOCh1Wu=B9OASw@mail.gmail.com>

+ <CAEC9zAYrMHHEyyTx1QVHoGSJU3fFypB0Hx4K-VFoUn0hp4Z7JA@mail.gmail.com>

+ <CAEC9zAbkWWcn5eRHLh6u+zyGu92E1Yq-9CQVPqE_6-QwMVs=4Q@mail.gmail.com>

+ <CA+8xBpdZDznkyWXn8AxdUDk0CJ0b2m1qpTgVjtPbs0ge+ODCSg@mail.gmail.com>

+ <CAEC9zAZR7xOUEJZz0f-Of0HTVAcL8uCw3tcR1s66Hg_kZbczRg@mail.gmail.com>

+Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"

+X-Mailer: Evolution 3.2.3-0ubuntu6

+Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

+Mime-Version: 1.0

+X-Spam-Score: -1.6 (-)

+X-Spam-Report: Spam Filtering performed by mx.sourceforge.net.

+ See http://spamassassin.org/tag/ for more details.

+ -1.5 SPF_CHECK_PASS SPF reports sender host as permitted sender for

+ sender-domain

+ 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider

+ (joel.kaartinen[at]gmail.com)

+ -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record

+ -0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from

+ author's domain

+ 0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,

+ not necessarily valid

+ -0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature

+X-Headers-End: 1TJi9z-0003uG-8q

+Cc: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net

+Subject: Re: [Bitcoin-development] performance testing for bitcoin

+X-BeenThere: bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net

+X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9

+Precedence: list

+List-Id: <bitcoin-development.lists.sourceforge.net>

+List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,

+ <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=unsubscribe>

+List-Archive: <http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_name=bitcoin-development>

+List-Post: <mailto:bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net>

+List-Help: <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=help>

+List-Subscribe: <https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development>,

+ <mailto:bitcoin-development-request@lists.sourceforge.net?subject=subscribe>

+X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2012 09:56:08 -0000

+

+For script evaluation benchmarking, I don't think just a good

+approximation of real-world traffic is enough. You really need to

+benchmark the worst case scenarios, otherwise you could be creating a

+DoS vulnerability.

+

+- Joel

+

+ke, 2012-10-03 kello 13:57 -0400, Ian Miers kirjoitti:

+> Script evaluation performance was what I was primarily concerned

+> with. I'm fooling around with adding some new instruction types.

+> The tricky part is that to test how that effects performance, you need

+> to be able to intersperse transactions with the new instructions with

+> existing ones. For accuracy, you'd like your simulated traffic to at

+> least approximate the real world traffic.

+>

+>

+>

+>

+> Also, is there any bench-marking / instrumentation in bitcoind ?

+>

+>

+> Ian

+> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 1:43 PM, Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@exmulti.com>

+> wrote:

+> On Wed, Oct 3, 2012 at 1:38 PM, Ian Miers <imiers1@jhu.edu>

+> wrote:

+> > Whats the best way to get performance numbers for

+> modifications to bitcoin ?

+> > Profiling it while running on testnet might work, but that

+> would take a

+> > rather long time to get data.

+> > Is there anyway to speed this up if we only needed to

+> provide relative

+> > performance between tests. (in a sense a fast performance

+> regression test).

+>

+>

+> You have to be specific about what you're measuring, because

+> "performance" is vague.

+>

+> You can measure many aspects of blockchain performance by

+> importing

+> blocks via -loadblock=FILE.

+>

+> Other performance measurements like "how fast does a block

+> relay

+> through the network" cannot be as easily measured.

+>

+> --

+> Jeff Garzik

+> exMULTI, Inc.

+> jgarzik@exmulti.com

+>

+>

+> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

+> Don't let slow site performance ruin your business. Deploy New Relic APM

+> Deploy New Relic app performance management and know exactly

+> what is happening inside your Ruby, Python, PHP, Java, and .NET app

+> Try New Relic at no cost today and get our sweet Data Nerd shirt too!

+> http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic-dev2dev

+> _______________________________________________ Bitcoin-development mailing list Bitcoin-development@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/bitcoin-development

+

+

+

+