davidgamez
commented
1 week ago Method
How the running time was extracted:
- Restored the beach feat/1698 base branch of #1771. In this PR, the time validationTimeSeconds was introduced to the JSON report. There were no significant changes from 5.0.1 to this branch.
- Created a PR with a branch based from feat/1698 to gather all JSON reports that include the new field validationTimeSeconds. This PR had to be against a similar branch due to a limitation in GitHub that blocks automation from running when conflicts are present more info.
- Created a Python script locally to compare metrics of the latest master acceptance tests with the one extracted from feat/1698(close to 5.0.1). The script also looks for the most significant changes in time consumption across all feeds.
- The Java memory max heap was increased to 12GB to avoid impacting the metrics due to crashing validators.
Results
Time performance metrics
| Metric | 5.0.1 | Master | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Average | 3.93 | 4.09 | 0.16 |
| Median | 1.38 | 1.47 | 0.09 |
| Std Dev | 11.07 | 11.44 | 0.37 |
| Min | feed_id: us-florida-citrus-county-transit-gtfs-630, time: 0.52 | feed_id: us-california-flex-v2-developer-test-feed-1-gtfs-1817, time: 0.55 | 0.03 |
| Max | feed_id: gb-unknown-uk-aggregate-feed-gtfs-2014, time: 289.51 | feed_id: gb-unknown-uk-aggregate-feed-gtfs-2014, time: 290.63 | 1.12 |
** All values are expressed in seconds
There is a minor increase in the metrics but not a significant increase.
Feeds with the most significant increase
The following chart lists the most significant changes in time; to reduce noise, it filters out all the changes in less than 5 seconds.
Only sixfour feeds differed by more than 5 seconds,and one of them reduced time.
Describe the problem
In order to be confident that the new column additions to stop_times.txt with Flex are not having a significant impact on the validator's performance, we want to compare the average runtime for the validation between 5.0 and 6.0.
Proposed solution
Include analytics about how long run time was in 5.0 vs. 6.0 for each feed.
Alternatives you've considered
No response
Additional context
No response