Hi Guillaume, Awesome, thanks a lot for getting the numbers and applying the improvements.
So to be sure, at runtime (non-metadata retrieval), CR3 already is faster than 5.4, also without your latest optimisations from the pending PR? You mentioned this morning that having the first 6 commits from your PR would be beneficial for the Final, but I think that's about reducing memory usage, correct? Thanks, --Gunnar 2017-07-21 18:47 GMT+02:00 Guillaume Smet <guillaume.s...@gmail.com>: > Hi, > > (Not a big fan of HTML emails but I gave up with formatting the table, > sorry) > > So I took the time to revisit the old BVal benchmark [1] and posted an > updated version of it here: https://github.com/gsmet/ > beanvalidation-benchmark. > > I pushed a few more commits to optimize the parsing/metadata building phase > here: https://github.com/hibernate/hibernate-validator/pull/814. > > Note that the benchmark is much more representative that our very simple > JMH tests: it generates a lot of bean definitions with constraints on > properties and getters (we were really bad on getters) that are more in > line with real life situations. > > The *checkRawValidationSpeed* bench only evaluates the validation > performances while the *checkRawParsingSpeed* test only evaluates the > parsing and metadata building phase (so clearly not realistic but it's a > good way to exercise and optimize this part). > > Results below. > > TLDR : > > - *Validation*: 6 as of my branch is ~ 2 times faster than BVal 1.1.2 > and HV 5.4.1.Final > - *Parsing/Metadata building* > - 6.0.0.CR3: we had quite a regression here, it's ~ 2 times slower > than 5.4.1.Final > - as of my branch, we are still a little slower than BVal but faster > than 5.4.1.Final > > *checkRawValidationSpeed* tester.repetitions=1000 > in ms, lower is better > > > > > > Run Apache Bval 1.1.2 HV 5.4.1.Final HV 6.0.0.CR3 HV 6.0.0-SNAPSHOT > 1 24808 19756 15307 12069 > 2 24853 23015 17637 12031 > 3 24884 22610 17680 11892 > 4 24837 22350 17564 11821 > > > > > > *checkRawParsingSpeed* tester.repetitions=200 > in ms, lower is better > > > > > > Run Apache Bval 1.1.2 HV 5.4.1.Final HV 6.0.0.CR3 HV 6.0.0-SNAPSHOT > 1 14387 18945 30046 14736 > 2 14409 17705 28250 14838 > 3 14539 17598 29500 14903 > 4 14279 18448 28876 15250 > > > [1] http://carinae.net/2010/06/benchmarking-hibernate-validator- > and-apache-beanvalidation-the-two-jsr-303-implementations/ > > > On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 4:44 PM, Guillaume Smet <guillaume.s...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > So, as we are leaning towards final, I made another round of benchmarking > > on HV 6. > > > > They are run on the same machine as the previous "Hibernate Validator 6 > > benchmarks results" I posted a few months ago [1] so they can be compared > > to these numbers (you'll notice the 5.4.1 numbers are about the same > > between the 2 emails). > > > > Note that these benchmarks only exercises the validation engine but does > > not report any violation. > > > > I think I'll add some more benchmarks to ensure violation reporting also > > moves in the right direction. > > > > It might also be a good occasion to revisit this benchmark: > > http://carinae.net/2010/06/benchmarking-hibernate-validator-and-apache- > > beanvalidation-the-two-jsr-303-implementations/ . With a large value of > > "revisit" as it's really basic but the scenarios are interesting. Note > that > > I'm a bit pessimistic on the parsing part: we now do a lot more work than > > before to deal with container elements so the startup cost will probably > be > > significantly higher. > > > > == Apache BVal 1.1.2 > > > > Result "org.hibernate.validator.performance.simple.SimpleValidation. > > testSimpleBeanValidation": > > 357.500 ±(99.9%) 5.327 ops/ms [Average] > > (min, avg, max) = (337.100, 357.500, 381.472), stdev = 10.760 > > CI (99.9%): [352.173, 362.827] (assumes normal distribution) > > > > Result "org.hibernate.validator.performance.cascaded.CascadedValidation. > > testCascadedValidation": > > 379.605 ±(99.9%) 5.817 ops/ms [Average] > > (min, avg, max) = (360.654, 379.605, 411.361), stdev = 11.750 > > CI (99.9%): [373.789, 385.422] (assumes normal distribution) > > > > (not really clear how BVal happens to be faster in the cascaded > validation > > case) > > > > == HV 5.4.1.Final > > > > Result "org.hibernate.validator.performance.simple.SimpleValidation. > > testSimpleBeanValidation": > > 558.196 ±(99.9%) 3.643 ops/ms [Average] > > (min, avg, max) = (542.396, 558.196, 575.360), stdev = 7.360 > > CI (99.9%): [554.552, 561.839] (assumes normal distribution) > > > > Result "org.hibernate.validator.performance.cascaded.CascadedValidation. > > testCascadedValidation": > > 285.788 ±(99.9%) 1.970 ops/ms [Average] > > (min, avg, max) = (278.611, 285.788, 298.530), stdev = 3.980 > > CI (99.9%): [283.817, 287.758] (assumes normal distribution) > > > > == Master from March after the first round of improvements (numbers taken > > from the previous email) > > > > Result > > "org.hibernate.validator.performance.simple.SimpleValidation. > > testSimpleBeanValidation": > > 869.546 ±(99.9%) 14.734 ops/ms [Average] > > (min, avg, max) = (760.007, 869.546, 909.206), stdev = 29.763 > > CI (99.9%): [854.813, 884.280] (assumes normal distribution) > > > > Result > > "org.hibernate.validator.performance.cascaded.CascadedValidation. > > testCascadedValidation": > > 343.699 ±(99.9%) 2.077 ops/ms [Average] > > (min, avg, max) = (331.333, 343.699, 352.626), stdev = 4.196 > > CI (99.9%): [341.622, 345.776] (assumes normal distribution) > > > > == HV 6 - Current master with https://github.com/hibernate/ > > hibernate-validator/pull/814 applied > > > > Result "org.hibernate.validator.performance.simple.SimpleValidation. > > testSimpleBeanValidation": > > 924.121 ±(99.9%) 3.686 ops/ms [Average] > > (min, avg, max) = (905.423, 924.121, 941.295), stdev = 7.446 > > CI (99.9%): [920.435, 927.807] (assumes normal distribution) > > > > Result "org.hibernate.validator.performance.cascaded.CascadedValidation. > > testCascadedValidation": > > 430.092 ±(99.9%) 3.661 ops/ms [Average] > > (min, avg, max) = (416.439, 430.092, 447.607), stdev = 7.396 > > CI (99.9%): [426.431, 433.754] (assumes normal distribution) > > > > == Conclusion > > > > The good news is that the results are even better than the ones from > > March, after some further tweaking. > > > > We are significantly faster than BVal in these scenarios and also > > significantly faster than 5.4.1.Final. > > > > Now, we need to get this PR in :). > > > > [1] http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/hibernate-dev/2017- > March/016057.html > > > _______________________________________________ > hibernate-dev mailing list > hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev > _______________________________________________ hibernate-dev mailing list hibernate-dev@lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/hibernate-dev
