docs(benchmark): adding gRPC read/write benchmark with fio#4787
docs(benchmark): adding gRPC read/write benchmark with fio#4787raj-prince wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
raj-prince
changed the title
github-actions
Bot
added
the
remind-reviewers
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #4787 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 83.66% 0 -83.67%
==========================================
Files 168 0 -168
Lines 20819 0 -20819
==========================================
- Hits 17419 0 -17419
+ Misses 2750 0 -2750
+ Partials 650 0 -650
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Summary of ChangesHello, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request introduces documentation to track and compare the performance of GCSFuse when utilizing gRPC versus the standard HTTP protocol. By providing clear benchmark tables and the associated FIO configurations, it enables better visibility into the performance characteristics and potential benefits of the gRPC implementation. Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize the Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counterproductive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for GitHub and other Google products, sign up here. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a new documentation file, docs/grpc_benchmarks.md, which compares GCSFuse performance metrics between HTTP and gRPC protocols across various FIO workloads. The review feedback highlights two issues in the FIO configuration templates: a stray character ◊ on line 76, and a duplicated invalidate=1 parameter on lines 123 and 129.
| fadvise_hint=0 | ||
| fallocate=none | ||
| invalidate=1 | ||
| thread=1◊ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There is a stray character ◊ at the end of thread=1. This should be removed to ensure the FIO configuration is valid.
| thread=1◊ | |
| thread=1 |
| [global] | ||
| ioengine=libaio | ||
| fadvise_hint=0 | ||
| invalidate=1 | ||
| thread=1 | ||
| openfiles=1 | ||
| group_reporting=1 | ||
| allrandrepeat=1 | ||
| verify=0 | ||
| invalidate=1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The invalidate=1 parameter is duplicated in the FIO configuration (on lines 123 and 129). One of them should be removed.
| [global] | |
| ioengine=libaio | |
| fadvise_hint=0 | |
| invalidate=1 | |
| thread=1 | |
| openfiles=1 | |
| group_reporting=1 | |
| allrandrepeat=1 | |
| verify=0 | |
| invalidate=1 | |
| [global] | |
| ioengine=libaio | |
| fadvise_hint=0 | |
| invalidate=1 | |
| thread=1 | |
| openfiles=1 | |
| group_reporting=1 | |
| allrandrepeat=1 | |
| verify=0 |
|
Hi @abhishek10004, @vadlakondaswetha, @PranjalC100, your feedback is needed to move this pull request forward. This automated reminder was triggered because there has been no activity for over 24 hours. Please provide your input when you have a moment. Thank you! |
1 similar comment
|
Hi @abhishek10004, @vadlakondaswetha, @PranjalC100, your feedback is needed to move this pull request forward. This automated reminder was triggered because there has been no activity for over 24 hours. Please provide your input when you have a moment. Thank you! |
1 participant
Description
Link to the issue in case of a bug fix.
Testing details
Any backward incompatible change? If so, please explain.