Add benchmarks for categories: serialization, validation and schema generation

[AdolfoVillalobos]

Change Summary

I created three tests to benchmark Pydantic's performance in basic categories:

• Schema generation
• Serialization
• Validation.

The tests handle varying levels of complexity ranging from simple tests to nested scenarios, inspired by the pydantic-core test suite.

Related issue number

Contributes to #9711

Checklist

• The pull request title is a good summary of the changes - it will be used in the changelog
• Unit tests for the changes exist
• Tests pass on CI
• Documentation reflects the changes where applicable
• My PR is ready to review, please add a comment including the phrase "please review" to assign reviewers

[codspeed-hq]

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #10240 will not alter performance

_{Comparing AdolfoVillalobos:test/expand-breadth-of-benchmarks (5bd3887) with main (9ad349a)}

Summary

✅ 17 untouched benchmarks

🆕 13 new benchmarks

Benchmarks breakdown

	Benchmark	main	AdolfoVillalobos:test/expand-breadth-of-benchmarks	Change
🆕	test_complex_model_schema_generation	N/A	3.4 ms	N/A
🆕	test_nested_model_schema_generation	N/A	3.6 ms	N/A
🆕	test_recursive_model_schema_generation	N/A	1.9 ms	N/A
🆕	test_simple_model_schema_generation	N/A	1.5 ms	N/A
🆕	test_complex_model_serialization	N/A	52.4 µs	N/A
🆕	test_list_of_models_serialization	N/A	62.7 µs	N/A
🆕	test_model_json_serialization	N/A	57.2 µs	N/A
🆕	test_nested_model_serialization	N/A	44.1 µs	N/A
🆕	test_simple_model_serialization	N/A	34.8 µs	N/A
🆕	test_complex_model_validation	N/A	58.1 µs	N/A
🆕	test_list_of_models_validation	N/A	100.2 µs	N/A
🆕	test_nested_model_validation	N/A	57.3 µs	N/A
🆕	test_simple_model_validation	N/A	44.3 µs	N/A

[AdolfoVillalobos]

I'm lost as to why the tests are failing. I can't see how my code is impacting them. I would really appreciate some advice ;) Thanks!

[Viicos]

Thanks for taking a stab at this. Regarding the benchmarks related to core schema generation, I'll probably expand these to meet my needs (related to #10223). I'll make sure to add you as a co-author.

[sydney-runkle]

Hmm, test failure does seem odd.

@AdolfoVillalobos, amazing work here - thanks for helping us to expand our benchmarks!

[sydney-runkle]

So odd, I can't repo that test failure locally, even when pulling your changes

[sydney-runkle]

I'll investigate this test failure on a separate branch, but have pushed a patch fix for now.

[github-actions]

Coverage report

This PR does not seem to contain any modification to coverable code.

[AdolfoVillalobos]

Thanks for taking a stab at this. Regarding the benchmarks related to core schema generation, I'll probably expand these to meet my needs (related to #10223). I'll make sure to add you as a co-author.

I'm glad this PR was helpful ;) Thanks!

[AdolfoVillalobos]

I'll investigate this test failure on a separate branch, but have pushed a patch fix for now.

Yess, it was a bit odd. I still don't quite get what was broken.

In any case, thanks for the help and support ;).

I love this project; It has helped me many times, so I am happy and proud to make my first contribution. Hopefully, I will continue to contribute in the future ;)