Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

feat(tx-pool): make benchmark inputs deterministic #13570

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 30, 2024
Merged

feat(tx-pool): make benchmark inputs deterministic #13570

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 30, 2024

Conversation

TropicalDog17
Copy link
Contributor

Partially addresses #13535

Use runner with deterministic runner for transaction-pool benches

@codspeed-hq CodSpeed HQ
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 28, 2024

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #13570 will degrade performances by 10.52%

Comparing TropicalDog17:tuan/tx-pool-bench-deterministic (1f7b732) with main (91dd417)

Summary

❌ 1 regressions
✅ 76 untouched benchmarks

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Benchmarks breakdown

Benchmark main TropicalDog17:tuan/tx-pool-bench-deterministic Change
❌ `hash builder[init size 10000 update size 100 num updates 1]` 9.1 ms

Rjected
Rjected approved these changes Dec 30, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@Rjected Rjected left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm, thanks!

@Rjected Rjected added this pull request to the merge queue Dec 30, 2024
Merged via the queue into paradigmxyz:main with commit e79199a Dec 30, 2024
43 of 44 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Rjected Rjected Rjected approved these changes

@mattsse mattsse Awaiting requested review from mattsse mattsse is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@TropicalDog17 @Rjected