GH-37463: [R] CRAN incoming checks fail due to test run length

[thisisnic]

Rationale for this change

Initial CRAN checks fail as it takes too long to run

What changes are included in this PR?

Skip tests for dplyr function bindings on CRAN

Are these changes tested?

No

Are there any user-facing changes?

No

• Closes: [R] CRAN incoming checks fail due to test run length #37463

[paleolimbot]

My back-of-the-napkin math from trying a few things (notably: system.time(devtools::test(filter = "^dplyr-funcs-")) and system.time(devtools::test())) suggests that this should reduce the time required to run the tests by 25%; however, this only equates to about 15 seconds of savings for me.

I think the majority of the check time is the build, though (not the tests)...will we ever be in a place where that happens reliably in less than 10 minutes?

[thisisnic]

My back-of-the-napkin math from trying a few things (notably: system.time(devtools::test(filter = "^dplyr-funcs-")) and system.time(devtools::test())) suggests that this should reduce the time required to run the tests by 25%; however, this only equates to about 15 seconds of savings for me.

I think the majority of the check time is the build, though (not the tests)...will we ever be in a place where that happens reliably in less than 10 minutes?

We haven't had this issue before, and we have it now, so it feels like it's a recent increase in build time. Hopefully the 15 seconds will be enough for this release. What else should we be considering to speed up the build time?

[paleolimbot]

In that case, I think CRAN/future readers of our test suite would benefit from a comment above these particular skip_on_cran() bits explaining why we don't test this functionality on CRAN.

[assignUser]

...will we ever be in a place where that happens reliably in less than 10 minutes?

If we build against system arrow yes ^^

[conbench-apache-arrow]

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 6 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit c6e2180.

There was 1 benchmark result indicating a performance regression:

• Commit Run on ursa-i9-9960x at 2023-09-01 09:35:33Z
  • tpch (R) with engine=arrow, format=native, language=R, memory_map=False, query_id=TPCH-06, scale_factor=1

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.