view tests/test-rebase-templates.t @ 38732:be4984261611

merge: mark file gets as not thread safe (issue5933)

In default installs, this has the effect of disabling the thread-based
worker on Windows when manifesting files in the working directory. My
measurements have shown that with revlog-based repositories, Mercurial
spends a lot of CPU time in revlog code resolving file data. This ends
up incurring a lot of context switching across threads and slows down
`hg update` operations when going from an empty working directory to
the tip of the repo.

On mozilla-unified (246,351 files) on an i7-6700K (4+4 CPUs):

before: 487s wall
after:  360s wall (equivalent to worker.enabled=false)
cpus=2: 379s wall

Even with only 2 threads, the thread pool is still slower.

The introduction of the thread-based worker (02b36e860e0b) states that
it resulted in a "~50%" speedup for `hg sparse --enable-profile` and
`hg sparse --disable-profile`. This disagrees with my measurement
above. I theorize a few reasons for this:

1) Removal of files from the working directory is I/O - not CPU - bound
   and should benefit from a thread pool (unless I/O is insanely fast
   and the GIL release is near instantaneous). So tests like `hg sparse
   --enable-profile` may exercise deletion throughput and aren't good
   benchmarks for worker tasks that are CPU heavy.
2) The patch was authored by someone at Facebook. The results were
   likely measured against a repository using remotefilelog. And I
   believe that revision retrieval during working directory updates with
   remotefilelog will often use a remote store, thus being I/O and not
   CPU bound. This probably resulted in an overstated performance gain.

Since there appears to be a need to enable the thread-based worker with
some stores, I've made the flagging of file gets as thread safe
configurable. I've made it experimental because I don't want to formalize
a boolean flag for this option and because this attribute is best
captured against the store implementation. But we don't have a proper
store API for this yet. I'd rather cross this bridge later.

It is possible there are revlog-based repositories that do benefit from
a thread-based worker. I didn't do very comprehensive testing. If there
are, we may want to devise a more proper algorithm for whether to use
the thread-based worker, including possibly config options to limit the
number of threads to use. But until I see evidence that justifies
complexity, simplicity wins.

Differential Revision: https://phab.mercurial-scm.org/D3963

Testing templating for rebase command

Setup

  $ cat >> $HGRCPATH <<EOF
  > [extensions]
  > rebase=
  > [experimental]
  > evolution=createmarkers
  > EOF

  $ hg init repo
  $ cd repo
  $ for ch in a b c d; do echo foo > $ch; hg commit -Aqm "Added "$ch; done

  $ hg log -G -T "{rev}:{node|short} {desc}"
  @  3:62615734edd5 Added d
  |
  o  2:28ad74487de9 Added c
  |
  o  1:29becc82797a Added b
  |
  o  0:18d04c59bb5d Added a
  
Getting the JSON output for nodechanges

  $ hg rebase -s 2 -d 0 -q -Tjson
  [
   {
    "nodechanges": {"28ad74487de9599d00d81085be739c61fc340652": ["849767420fd5519cf0026232411a943ed03cc9fb"], "62615734edd52f06b6fb9c2beb429e4fe30d57b8": ["df21b32134ba85d86bca590cbe9b8b7cbc346c53"]}
   }
  ]

  $ hg log -G -T "{rev}:{node|short} {desc}"
  @  5:df21b32134ba Added d
  |
  o  4:849767420fd5 Added c
  |
  | o  1:29becc82797a Added b
  |/
  o  0:18d04c59bb5d Added a
  
  $ hg rebase -s 1 -d 5 -q -T "{nodechanges|json}"
  {"29becc82797a4bc11ec8880b58eaecd2ab3e7760": ["d9d6773efc831c274eace04bc13e8e6412517139"]} (no-eol)

  $ hg log -G -T "{rev}:{node|short} {desc}"
  o  6:d9d6773efc83 Added b
  |
  @  5:df21b32134ba Added d
  |
  o  4:849767420fd5 Added c
  |
  o  0:18d04c59bb5d Added a
  

  $ hg rebase -s 6 -d 4 -q -T "{nodechanges % '{oldnode}:{newnodes % ' {node} '}'}"
  d9d6773efc831c274eace04bc13e8e6412517139: f48cd65c6dc3d2acb55da54402a5b029546e546f  (no-eol)