Skip to content

Conversation

@jonathan-eq
Copy link
Contributor

@jonathan-eq jonathan-eq commented Dec 23, 2025

Issue
Resolves #my_issue

Approach
Short description of the approach

(Screenshot of new behavior in GUI if applicable)

  • PR title captures the intent of the changes, and is fitting for release notes.
  • Added appropriate release note label
  • Commit history is consistent and clean, in line with the contribution guidelines.
  • Make sure unit tests pass locally after every commit (git rebase -i main --exec 'just rapid-tests')

When applicable

  • When there are user facing changes: Updated documentation
  • New behavior or changes to existing untested code: Ensured that unit tests are added (See Ground Rules).
  • Large PR: Prepare changes in small commits for more convenient review
  • Bug fix: Add regression test for the bug
  • Bug fix: Add backport label to latest release (format: 'backport release-branch-name')

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Dec 23, 2025

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 90.62%. Comparing base (dc78922) to head (5c6ee5b).
⚠️ Report is 7 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #12552      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   90.62%   90.62%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         432      432              
  Lines       29738    29748      +10     
==========================================
+ Hits        26951    26959       +8     
- Misses       2787     2789       +2     
Flag Coverage Δ
cli-tests 37.63% <100.00%> (+0.04%) ⬆️
gui-tests 68.71% <100.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
performance-and-unit-tests 74.14% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
test 38.35% <87.50%> (+0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@jonathan-eq jonathan-eq moved this to Ready for Review in SCOUT Dec 23, 2025
@jonathan-eq jonathan-eq added the release-notes:logging PR which only changes logging. label Dec 23, 2025
@codspeed-hq
Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Dec 23, 2025

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #12552 will not alter performance

Comparing jonathan-eq:add-timings (5c6ee5b) with main (2981e59)

Summary

✅ 22 untouched

fs: Ensemble from which to load parameter data
Returns:
Returns the union of parameters returned by write_to_runpath for each
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should this be updated to reflect the change of return object?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes, this is hopefully just here temporarily (but probably not)...

Copy link

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull request overview

This PR adds detailed timing instrumentation to the _generate_parameter_files function to identify which parameter type might be causing performance issues during run path creation. The main changes include tracking timing for individual parameter type exports and aggregating these detailed timings in the create_run_path function's existing timing dictionary.

  • Modified _generate_parameter_files to return both parameter data and detailed timing information
  • Added timing measurements for each parameter type export operation and file I/O operations
  • Aggregated parameter-specific timings in the main create_run_path function

for group, vals in log_export_values.items():
log_exports.setdefault(group, {}).update(vals)
export_timings[param.type] += time.perf_counter() - start_time
continue
Copy link

Copilot AI Jan 5, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The continue statement at the end of the loop is redundant and should be removed. Since this is the last statement in the loop body, execution will naturally continue to the next iteration without an explicit continue statement.

Suggested change
continue

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
Copy link
Contributor

@frode-aarstad frode-aarstad left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🚀

@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Ready for Review to Reviewed in SCOUT Jan 5, 2026
@jonathan-eq jonathan-eq merged commit 33439f8 into equinor:main Jan 5, 2026
41 checks passed
@github-project-automation github-project-automation bot moved this from Reviewed to Done in SCOUT Jan 5, 2026
@scout-team-app
Copy link

scout-team-app bot commented Jan 5, 2026

Backport failed for version-18.0, because it was unable to cherry-pick the commit(s).

Please cherry-pick the changes locally and resolve any conflicts.

git fetch origin version-18.0
git worktree add -d .worktree/backport-12552-to-version-18.0 origin/version-18.0
cd .worktree/backport-12552-to-version-18.0
git switch --create backport-12552-to-version-18.0
git cherry-pick -x 33439f80a133249194a8f50fc8abe18460c4ff60

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants