-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.9k
coverage: use ctrace core to avoid CI slowdown on Python 3.14
#13991
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
Conversation
While `sysmon` (default since Python 3.14) is supposed to be faster, it about 3x slower in CI (~24m vs. ~8m) ATM. https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/latest/config.html#config-run-core https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/latest/faq.html#q-coverage-py-is-much-slower-than-i-remember-what-s-going-on
|
Have you reported this to @nedbat? |
|
There is already an issue coveragepy/coveragepy#2082. |
Backport to 9.0.x: 💔 cherry-picking failed — conflicts found❌ Failed to cleanly apply 1b5200c on top of patchback/backports/9.0.x/1b5200c0f056ec58f5620417d3157aea3ba33c87/pr-13991 Backporting merged PR #13991 into main
🤖 @patchback |
|
It might be helpful to run the tests with sysmon, and also |
|
And BTW, use the latest main of coveragepy to get full details. |
coverage: use `ctrace` core to avoid CI slowdown on Python 3.14 (cherry picked from commit 1b5200c)
|
Backported manually: #13995 |
While
sysmon(default since Python 3.14) is supposed to be faster, it about 3x slower in CI (~24m vs. ~8m) ATM.https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/latest/config.html#config-run-core https://coverage.readthedocs.io/en/latest/faq.html#q-coverage-py-is-much-slower-than-i-remember-what-s-going-on