Hi, Brent:
I have test MBARI patch on JavaEye.com (http://www.javaeye.com) , that i=
s
a chinese software development community website which has 200,000 members
and 800,00 pageviews per day. JavaEye is written by Ruby on Rails and
running with lighttpd/fastcgi mode. The server environment: AMD64 machine,
SuSE Linux x86-64, ruby 1.8.7-p72 and Rails 2.1.2.
I test Rails app performance and memory usage with 4 ruby implements:=20
1. ruby MRI 1.8.7-p72
2. ruby 1.8.7-p72 with Railsbench GC patch and set GC variables below:
RUBY_HEAP_MIN_SLOTS=3D600000
RUBY_HEAP_SLOTS_INCREMENT=3D600000
RUBY_HEAP_FREE_MIN=3D100000
RUBY_GC_MALLOC_LIMIT=3D60000000
=20
3. ruby 1.8.7-p72 with MBARI patch.
4. ruby 1.8.7-p72 with MBARI patch but I modified GC variables in gc.c
same as above.
Test one: Simple Rails app
I create a simple rails app to test rails routes and template rendering=
:
ab -c 1 -n 1000 http://localhost:3000/test/index
ruby version performance memory=20
-----------------------------------------------------
ruby 106 request/s 39MB
ruby GC patch 125 request/s 60MB
ruby MBARI patch 160 request/s 35MB
ruby MBARI merge GC patch 173 request/s 60MB
Test One Summary: MBARI patch save a little memory than MRI but improve
rails performance significantly.
Test two: Real Rails website test
=20
I select two typical page on JavaEye.com to benchmark:
Page 1 : http://robbin.javaeye.com/=20
ab -c 1 -n 100 http://robbin.joinnet.cn/
ruby version performance memory=20
-----------------------------------------------------
ruby 1.69 request/s 136MB
ruby GC patch 2.81 request/s 179MB
ruby MBARI patch 1.96 request/s 103MB
ruby MBARI merge GC patch 2.90 request/s 158MB
Page 2: http://robbin.joinnet.cn/blog/283992
ruby version performance memory=20
-----------------------------------------------------
ruby 2.20 request/s 136MB
ruby GC patch 3.61 request/s 179MB
ruby MBARI patch 2.47 request/s 103MB
ruby MBARI merge GC patch 3.73 request/s 158MB
Test Two Summary:=20
1. MBARI patch not only save a lot of memory than MRI but also improve
rails performance about 13%
2. MBARI merge with Railsbench GC patch win others with the highest rail=
s
performance and save some memory than Railsbench GC patch.
My suggest:
1. MBARI patch has some uncompatible with complicated Regexp. for
example, I met this error: premature end of regular expression: /0=C3=A3k
\000\000\000\000x/ On line #12 of blog/index/_blog.rhtml
2. I wish MBARI merge Railsbench GC patch, because Railsbench GC patch
has a lot of rails performance improvement on JavaEye.com website.
3. I expect MBARI merge into ruby trunk :)
Brent Roman wrote:
>=20
> I've finally put together the promised set of patches against version
> 1.8.7-p72 and posted them at:
>=20
> http://sites.google.com/site/brentsrubypatches
>=20
> From that page:
>=20
> Aside from bug fixes, the primary goal of these patches is to reduce the
> memory consumption of the 1.8 series Ruby interpreters. Happily, these
> same techniques tend also to increase the speed of most applications, but
> speed increase was not my primary concern.=20
>=20
> Each of the six patches below (mbari1-6) fixes a specific problem with or
> optimizes some facet of the Ruby interpreter. The patches were intended
> to be applied in order, starting with official interpreter release
> 1.8.7-patchlevel72 from ruby-lang.org. However, you may be able to apply
> only a subset of them if you don't want a particular feature or
> optimization.
>=20
> Until more people test them, this must all be treated as alpha quality
> software. ...
>=20
> My development environment today is 32-bit Intel x86 Linux compiling with
> gcc version 4.3.2. I've tried to keep these patches portable to other
> platforms, but will make no such claims until others have tested them
> there. If you test these under MS-Windows, I'll be interested and try to
> be helpful, but I won't be able to verify your results.
>=20
> Please post any bugs, flames, benchmark results, requests for improvement=
,
> etc. to the ruby-core mailing list by replying to this message.
>=20
--=20
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/-ruby-core%3A19846---Bu=
g--744--memory-leak-in-callcc--tp20447794p21140287.html
Sent from the ruby-core mailing list archive at Nabble.com.