From 63c02c9ff5aaf2d9a5b65e82bdc362a223e751a9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Klaas van Schelven <klaas@vanschelven.com>
Date: Tue, 19 Dec 2023 17:08:57 +0100
Subject: [PATCH] print_thoughts_about PeriodCounter.inc()

---
 performance/out/some_script.txt |  9 +++++++-
 performance/some_script.py      | 40 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
 2 files changed, 46 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/performance/out/some_script.txt b/performance/out/some_script.txt
index 7ae409a..3791013 100644
--- a/performance/out/some_script.txt
+++ b/performance/out/some_script.txt
@@ -1,7 +1,14 @@
-1_000 iterations of _prev_tup in 1.608ms. The main thing we care about is not this little
+## _prev_tup()
+
+1_000 iterations of _prev_tup in 1.608mss. The main thing we care about is not this little
 private helper though, but PeriodCounter.inc(). Let's test that next.
 
 On testing: I noticed variations of a factor 2 even running these tests only a couple of times. For now I picked the
 slow results for a check in.
 
 
+## PeriodCounter.inc()
+
+1_000 iterations of PeriodCounter.inc() in 82.716ms. We care about evaluation of some event more though. Let's
+test that next.
+
diff --git a/performance/some_script.py b/performance/some_script.py
index a4cd1b7..a89c734 100644
--- a/performance/some_script.py
+++ b/performance/some_script.py
@@ -1,6 +1,10 @@
+import random
 import time
+from datetime import datetime, timezone
 
-from bugsink.period_counter import _prev_tup
+from bugsink.period_counter import _prev_tup, PeriodCounter
+
+from performance.bursty_data import generate_bursty_data, buckets_to_points_in_time
 
 
 # this file is the beginning of an approach to getting a handle on performance.
@@ -21,7 +25,9 @@ def print_thoughts_about_prev_tup():
         for i in range(1_000):
             v = _prev_tup(v)
 
-    print(f"""1_000 iterations of _prev_tup in {t.elapsed:.3f}ms. The main thing we care about is not this little
+    print(f"""## _prev_tup()
+
+1_000 iterations of _prev_tup in {t.elapsed:.3f}ms. The main thing we care about is not this little
 private helper though, but PeriodCounter.inc(). Let's test that next.
 
 On testing: I noticed variations of a factor 2 even running these tests only a couple of times. For now I picked the
@@ -31,6 +37,36 @@ slow results for a check in.
 
 
 def print_thoughts_about_inc():
+    random.seed(42)
+
+    pc = PeriodCounter()
+
+    # make sure the pc has some data before we start
+    for point in buckets_to_points_in_time(
+        generate_bursty_data(num_buckets=350, expected_nr_of_bursts=10),
+        datetime(2020, 10, 15, tzinfo=timezone.utc),
+        datetime(2021, 10, 15, 10, 5, tzinfo=timezone.utc),
+        10_000,
+            ):
+
+        pc.inc(point)
+
+    points = buckets_to_points_in_time(
+        generate_bursty_data(num_buckets=25, expected_nr_of_bursts=5),
+        datetime(2021, 10, 15, 10, 5, tzinfo=timezone.utc),
+        datetime(2021, 10, 16, 10, 5, tzinfo=timezone.utc),
+        1000)
+
+    with passed_time() as t:
+        for point in points:
+            pc.inc(point)
+
+    print(f"""## PeriodCounter.inc()
+
+1_000 iterations of PeriodCounter.inc() in {t.elapsed:.3f}ms. We care about evaluation of some event more though. Let's
+test that next.
+""")
 
 
 print_thoughts_about_prev_tup()
+print_thoughts_about_inc()