Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add per-batch verify time metrics to sigverify #35392

Closed

Conversation

apfitzge
Copy link
Contributor

@apfitzge apfitzge commented Mar 1, 2024

Problem

  • We currently report verify time stats per packet and not per batch
  • per-batch timing is useful because when combined with other timing metrics it gives us latency for batch processing in sigverify stage

Summary of Changes

  • Add per-batch verify time metrics (90p, max, min, mean) to sigverify stats

Fixes #

@apfitzge
Copy link
Contributor Author

apfitzge commented Mar 1, 2024

  • probably if we want to do something like this we actually want to report per batch times for the other metrics (discard, dedup, etc) instead of per-packet timings.

@t-nelson you got thoughts on this before I do the work to add those others?

Copy link

codecov bot commented Mar 1, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 81.6%. Comparing base (cd4cf81) to head (3fd5e12).
Report is 78 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           master   #35392     +/-   ##
=========================================
- Coverage    81.6%    81.6%   -0.1%     
=========================================
  Files         834      834             
  Lines      224827   224830      +3     
=========================================
- Hits       183555   183512     -43     
- Misses      41272    41318     +46     

@willhickey
Copy link
Contributor

This repository is no longer in use. Please re-open this pull request in the agave repo: https://github.com/anza-xyz/agave

@willhickey willhickey closed this Mar 3, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants