Re: [PATCH] trace2: log progress time and throughput

Emily Shaffer [off-list ref] writes:

Rather than teaching only one operation, like 'git fetch', how to write
down throughput to traces, we can learn about a wide range of user
operations that may seem slow by adding tooling to the progress library
itself. Operations which display progress are likely to be slow-running
and the kind of thing we want to monitor for performance anyways. By
showing object counts and data transfer size, we should be able to
make some derived measurements to ensure operations are scaling the way
we expect.

Excellent observation ;-)

Signed-off-by: Emily Shaffer <redacted>
---
One note: by putting trace collection into the progress library, we end
up with data events which have titles like "Receiving objects" - not
very machine-parseable. An alternative might be to ask for a
machine-readable title in the progress struct, but I didn't think it was
worth the code churn.

Perhaps make it an optional member of the struct, and convert only a
selected few callers to set it and see how well it helps, while
leaving all the other callers set NULL to the member to keep showing
not-very-useful titles?

CI run here, although it failed on the same error Junio noted today[1]:

I think Dscho's latest patch, even though it didn't mention my message,
is to fix that error.  So with that queued in the same batch, we'll
see a full CI coverage again.

Will queue.  Thanks.