tests/test-revlog-ancestry.py

util: lower water mark when removing nodes after cost limit reached

See the inline comment for the reasoning here. This is a pretty
common strategy for garbage collectors, other cache-like primtives.

The performance impact is substantial:

$ hg perflrucachedict --size 4 --gets 1000000 --sets 1000000 --mixed 1000000 --costlimit 100
! inserts w/ cost limit
! wall 1.659181 comb 1.650000 user 1.650000 sys 0.000000 (best of 7)
! wall 1.722122 comb 1.720000 user 1.720000 sys 0.000000 (best of 6)
! mixed w/ cost limit
! wall 1.139955 comb 1.140000 user 1.140000 sys 0.000000 (best of 9)
! wall 1.182513 comb 1.180000 user 1.180000 sys 0.000000 (best of 9)

$ hg perflrucachedict --size 1000 --gets 1000000 --sets 1000000 --mixed 1000000 --costlimit 10000
! inserts
! wall 0.679546 comb 0.680000 user 0.680000 sys 0.000000 (best of 15)
! sets
! wall 0.825147 comb 0.830000 user 0.830000 sys 0.000000 (best of 13)
! inserts w/ cost limit
! wall 25.105273 comb 25.080000 user 25.080000 sys 0.000000 (best of 3)
! wall  1.724397 comb  1.720000 user  1.720000 sys 0.000000 (best of 6)
! mixed
! wall 0.807096 comb 0.810000 user 0.810000 sys 0.000000 (best of 13)
! mixed w/ cost limit
! wall 12.104470 comb 12.070000 user 12.070000 sys 0.000000 (best of 3)
! wall  1.190563 comb  1.190000 user  1.190000 sys 0.000000 (best of 9)

$ hg perflrucachedict --size 1000 --gets 1000000 --sets 1000000 --mixed 1000000 --costlimit 10000 --mixedgetfreq 90
! inserts
! wall 0.711177 comb 0.710000 user 0.710000 sys 0.000000 (best of 14)
! sets
! wall 0.846992 comb 0.850000 user 0.850000 sys 0.000000 (best of 12)
! inserts w/ cost limit
! wall 25.963028 comb 25.960000 user 25.960000 sys 0.000000 (best of 3)
! wall  2.184311 comb  2.180000 user  2.180000 sys 0.000000 (best of 5)
! mixed
! wall 0.728256 comb 0.730000 user 0.730000 sys 0.000000 (best of 14)
! mixed w/ cost limit
! wall 3.174256 comb 3.170000 user 3.170000 sys 0.000000 (best of 4)
! wall 0.773186 comb 0.770000 user 0.770000 sys 0.000000 (best of 13)

$ hg perflrucachedict --size 100000 --gets 1000000 --sets 1000000 --mixed 1000000 --mixedgetfreq 90 --costlimit 5000000
! gets
! wall 1.191368 comb 1.190000 user 1.190000 sys 0.000000 (best of 9)
! wall 1.195304 comb 1.190000 user 1.190000 sys 0.000000 (best of 9)
! inserts
! wall 0.950995 comb 0.950000 user 0.950000 sys 0.000000 (best of 11)
! inserts w/ cost limit
! wall 1.589732 comb 1.590000 user 1.590000 sys 0.000000 (best of 7)
! sets
! wall 1.094941 comb 1.100000 user 1.090000 sys 0.010000 (best of 9)
! mixed
! wall 0.936420 comb 0.940000 user 0.930000 sys 0.010000 (best of 10)
! mixed w/ cost limit
! wall 0.882780 comb 0.870000 user 0.870000 sys 0.000000 (best of 11)

This puts us ~2x slower than caches without cost accounting. And for
read-heavy workloads (the prime use cases for caches), performance is
nearly identical.

In the worst case (pure write workloads with cost accounting enabled),
we're looking at ~1.5us per insert on large caches. That seems "fast
enough."

Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D4505

from __future__ import absolute_import, print_function
import os
from mercurial import (
    hg,
    merge,
    ui as uimod,
)

u = uimod.ui.load()

repo = hg.repository(u, b'test1', create=1)
os.chdir('test1')

def commit(text, time):
    repo.commit(text=text, date=b"%d 0" % time)

def addcommit(name, time):
    f = open(name, 'wb')
    f.write(b'%s\n' % name)
    f.close()
    repo[None].add([name])
    commit(name, time)

def update(rev):
    merge.update(repo, rev, False, True)

def merge_(rev):
    merge.update(repo, rev, True, False)

if __name__ == '__main__':
    addcommit(b"A", 0)
    addcommit(b"B", 1)

    update(0)
    addcommit(b"C", 2)

    merge_(1)
    commit(b"D", 3)

    update(2)
    addcommit(b"E", 4)
    addcommit(b"F", 5)

    update(3)
    addcommit(b"G", 6)

    merge_(5)
    commit(b"H", 7)

    update(5)
    addcommit(b"I", 8)

    # Ancestors
    print('Ancestors of 5')
    for r in repo.changelog.ancestors([5]):
        print(r, end=' ')

    print('\nAncestors of 6 and 5')
    for r in repo.changelog.ancestors([6, 5]):
        print(r, end=' ')

    print('\nAncestors of 5 and 4')
    for r in repo.changelog.ancestors([5, 4]):
        print(r, end=' ')

    print('\nAncestors of 7, stop at 6')
    for r in repo.changelog.ancestors([7], 6):
        print(r, end=' ')

    print('\nAncestors of 7, including revs')
    for r in repo.changelog.ancestors([7], inclusive=True):
        print(r, end=' ')

    print('\nAncestors of 7, 5 and 3, including revs')
    for r in repo.changelog.ancestors([7, 5, 3], inclusive=True):
        print(r, end=' ')

    # Descendants
    print('\n\nDescendants of 5')
    for r in repo.changelog.descendants([5]):
        print(r, end=' ')

    print('\nDescendants of 5 and 3')
    for r in repo.changelog.descendants([5, 3]):
        print(r, end=' ')

    print('\nDescendants of 5 and 4')
    print(*repo.changelog.descendants([5, 4]), sep=' ')