HackerPapers

arXiv:cs/0404043cs.PF

Benchmarking Blunders and Things That Go Bump in the Night

Neil J. Gunther

HN submission. Found in a submission link or body. Submitters do not count as commenters in the main ranking; a submission is not an endorsement.

Abstract

Benchmarking; by which I mean any computer system that is driven by a controlled workload, is the ultimate in performance testing and simulation. Aside from being a form of institutionalized cheating, it also offer countless opportunities for systematic mistakes in the way the workloads are applied and the resulting measurements interpreted. Right test, wrong conclusion is a ubiquitous mistake that happens because test engineers tend to treat data as divine. Such reverence is not only misplaced, it's also a sure ticket to production hell when the application finally goes live. I demonstrate how such mistakes can be avoided by means of two war stories that are real WOPRs. (a) How to resolve benchmark flaws over the psychic hotline and (b) How benchmarks can go flat with too much Java juice. In each case I present simple performance models and show how they can be applied to correctly assess benchmark data.

arXiv comments
Invited presentation at the Workshop On Software Performance and Reliability (WOPR2) Menlo Park, California, April 15-17 2004
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.PFPerformance cs.SESoftware Engineering

On Hacker News

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Found in 1 HN submission from Sep 2023 to Sep 2023. Open submission discussions.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments0 threads

No comments linking this paper were found in the collected sources. Open submission discussions.

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.