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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Investigate performance of Strawberry #3

Open
rjwills28 opened this issue Aug 9, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

Investigate performance of Strawberry #3

rjwills28 opened this issue Aug 9, 2022 · 1 comment

Comments

@rjwills28
Copy link
Owner

Run some tests to compare the CPU and memory usage of the strawberry implementation vs the original Coniql.
@rjwills28
Copy link
Owner Author

I ran a basic test with 100 PVs updating at 10 Hz and using the cs-web-proto performance test to subscribe and display the updates. Below are the results:

Original Coniql: CPU = 24 %, Memory = 55 MB
Strawberry Coniql: CPU = 12 %, Memory = 56 MB

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@rjwills28