chore: Update JMH performance benchmarking baseline - #4229
Conversation
product-auto-label
Bot
added
size: xs
Summary of ChangesHello @sakthivelmanii, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request performs a routine maintenance update to the JMH performance benchmarking baseline. It adjusts the acceptable performance deviation for certain metrics, ensuring that the benchmark results continue to accurately reflect expected performance characteristics and tolerances. Highlights
Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request updates the JMH performance benchmark baseline, increasing the allowed performance deviation from 15% to 20% for two benchmarks. This effectively accepts a performance regression. However, the pull request description lacks any justification for this change. It is crucial to document why this performance degradation is acceptable to prevent unintended, cumulative performance regressions in the future. My review includes comments highlighting this and also suggests a minor improvement to use numeric types instead of strings for numeric values in the JSON configuration for better type safety.
84778f8 to
d1599d8
Compare
2 participants
Description:
Due to local networking, CPU, memory there can be slight variance in performance between runs. 15% is not enough which is producing false positives. Increasing to 20% to avoid false positives.