Projects/Utils/kwallet/Benchmark

Summary

One of the main concerns users had with the wallet was that new entries weren't saved immediately (bug #105752). Before actually getting to work and coding a workaround (appending new passwords to the file without reencrypting all of it or creating a second file where new passwords are appended) I benchmarked the existing encryption to check the actual overhead that would be incurred by saving to the kwl file as soon as passwords were entered.

Code

I used the following code for benchmarking. Please keep in mind:

keys and passwords generated using random data are probably longer than the entries you actually have in your wallet.
only syncing the wallet is benchmarked
due to hd caching (and a rather modest filesize), most of the time reported should be used encrypting the data.


include <kaboutdata.h>
include <kcomponentdata.h>
include <kcmdlineargs.h>
include <kdebug.h>
include <kwallet.h>
include <QApplication>
include <QTime>
include <QFile>

include "../backend/kwalletentry.h"
include "../backend/kwalletbackend.h"

using namespace KWallet;
static int getRandomBlock(QByteArray& randBlock) {

 QFile devrand("/dev/urandom");
 if (devrand.open(QIODevice::ReadOnly)) {
   int rc = devrand.read(randBlock.data(), randBlock.size());
   if (rc != randBlock.size()) {
     return -3;              // not enough data read
   }
   return 0;
 }

 return -1;

}


int main(int argc, char **argv) {

 KAboutData aboutData("kwalletbench", 0, ki18n("kwalletbench"), "version");
 KComponentData componentData(&aboutData);
 QApplication app( argc, argv );

 Backend back("/tmp/benchmark.kwl", true);

 back.open("benchmark");
 back.createFolder("benchmark");
 back.setFolder("benchmark");

 for (int i = 0; i <= 100000; i+=100) {
   for (int j = 0; j < 100; ++j) {
     Entry entry;
     QByteArray key, value;
     key.resize(20);
     if (getRandomBlock(key) != 0) {
       kDebug(0) << "Error";
     }
     value.resize(50);
     if (getRandomBlock(value) != 0) {
       kDebug(0) << "Error";
     }
     entry.setType(Wallet::Password);
     entry.setKey(key);
     entry.setValue(value);
     back.writeEntry(&entry);
   }

   QTime _start = QTime::currentTime();
   back.sync("benchmark");
   QTime _end = QTime::currentTime();

   kDebug(0) << i << ";" << _start.msecsTo(_end);
 }

 back.close();

 return 0;

}

Results

I benchmarked on a Q6600. As the encrypting code is single-threaded, only one core (2.4GHz) is being used. Please bear in mind that I didn't bother to run the test several times as the results are pretty clear - unfortunately this makes some of the numbers seem a little weird.

DebugFull
- 1 password: 16ms
- 100 passwords: 15ms
- 1000 passwords: 32ms
- 5000 passwords: 107ms
- 10000 passwords: 192ms
Release
- 1 password: 8ms
- 100 passwords: 5ms
- 1000 passwords: 15ms
- 5000 passwords: 25ms
- 10000 passwords: 56ms

Discussion

I assume that your usual wallet will contain less than 1000 entries. Due to the fact that any workaround would have to encrypt at least 1 entry (~ 8ms) this workaround would save around 15ms - 8ms = 7ms. This is clearly insignificant. Big overhead for syncing the wallet seems to be a myth.

Projects/Utils/kwallet/Benchmark

Contents