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.

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

test: don't inspect values if not necessary #22903

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

BridgeAR
Copy link
Member

The inspection triggered on each assert call eagerly even tough the
assertion was never triggered. That caused significant CPU overhead.

I currently try to figure out what a nice API would look like for lazy custom assert messages but this can go in right away.

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

The inspection triggered on each assert call eagerly even tough the
assertion was never triggered. That caused significant CPU overhead.
@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the test Issues and PRs related to the tests. label Sep 17, 2018
@BridgeAR BridgeAR added the fast-track PRs that do not need to wait for 48 hours to land. label Sep 17, 2018
@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member Author

@BridgeAR BridgeAR added the author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. label Sep 17, 2018
@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Sep 18, 2018

Resume build: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/17270/ ✔️ (besides arm)

I expect the arm-fanned re-run to fail so that will need a Rebuild, but let's see if this at least clears up the other two red subtasks.

@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member Author

BridgeAR commented Sep 18, 2018

@BridgeAR
Copy link
Member Author

Landed in 9ccf5c8 🎉

@BridgeAR BridgeAR closed this Sep 18, 2018
BridgeAR added a commit to BridgeAR/node that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2018
The inspection triggered on each assert call eagerly even tough the
assertion was never triggered. That caused significant CPU overhead.

PR-URL: nodejs#22903
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
@addaleax
Copy link
Member

@BridgeAR Just for future reference, from our collaborator guide:

When a pull request is deemed suitable to be fast-tracked, label it with
fast-track. The pull request can be landed once 2 or more Collaborators
approve both the pull request and the fast-tracking request, […]

What most people do is to something like “:+1: this comment if you approve of fast-tracking” to a comment on the PR, and then wait for approvals.

targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 18, 2018
The inspection triggered on each assert call eagerly even tough the
assertion was never triggered. That caused significant CPU overhead.

PR-URL: #22903
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 19, 2018
The inspection triggered on each assert call eagerly even tough the
assertion was never triggered. That caused significant CPU overhead.

PR-URL: #22903
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 20, 2018
The inspection triggered on each assert call eagerly even tough the
assertion was never triggered. That caused significant CPU overhead.

PR-URL: #22903
Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <anna@addaleax.net>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
@BridgeAR BridgeAR deleted the minimize-inspect-overhead branch January 20, 2020 11:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
author ready PRs that have at least one approval, no pending requests for changes, and a CI started. fast-track PRs that do not need to wait for 48 hours to land. test Issues and PRs related to the tests.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants