Ok - i sensed it was in relation to the StarGraph conversation but I wasn't sure if you were going bigger/more general than that - thanks for clarifying and what you offered that sounds good.
On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 9:03 AM, Ted Wilmes <twil...@gmail.com> wrote: > In this case, by implementations, I just meant various permutations of the > serialization format. Harness was probably to grand of a term. I was > thinking a set of benchmarks that could be used to compare different > variations on our internal StarGraph serialization as we try them out, > really just to make comparison while developing easier. > > On Mon, Jun 27, 2016 at 4:49 AM, Stephen Mallette <spmalle...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Ted, when you say: > > > > "benchmarking harness so that it would be easy to swap various > > implementations" > > > > do you mean like gremlin-benchmark would be useful to other graph > > providers? like UniPop could run gremlin-benchmark over its > implementation > > and compare it to Titan? > > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 5:23 PM, Ted Wilmes <twil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > If folks thought it was a good idea, I'd love to put together a little > > > benchmarking harness so that it would be easy to swap various > > > implementations & tweaks in and out to measure how they perform. For > > > example, benchmarks running against different #'s of vertex properties, > > > edge counts, # of properties / edge, measuring things like latency, > size > > in > > > memory, and size on disk. I need to finish up TinkerPop-1254, but > then I > > > could take a crack at this. I already have done some work towards this > > in > > > TinkerPop-1287 to confirm improvements from stream removal in key spots > > so > > > perhaps I could extend upon that. > > > > > > --Ted > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 3:49 PM, Marko Rodriguez <okramma...@gmail.com > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > TinkerPop 3.3.0 is not slated for anytime soon, but some buddies are > > > > interested in a making the serialization format of StarGraph more > > > > efficient. Given it would be a major breaking change, we can’t do it > > till > > > > TinkerPop 3.3.0, but we can talk about it and design it. Here is a > > ticket > > > > to get us underway. Your thoughts are more than welcome: > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1343 < > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1343> > > > > > > > > Take care, > > > > Marko. > > > > > > > > http://markorodriguez.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
