Lightrun Answers was designed to reduce the constant googling that comes with debugging 3rd party libraries. It collects links to all the places you might be looking at while hunting down a tough bug.
And, if you’re still stuck at the end, we’re happy to hop on a call to see how we can help out.
Have at least some benchmarks run against the actual DB rather than the MemoryDB
See original GitHub issueWhat is wrong?
Currently, all our benchmarks run against the MemoryDB. Unfortunately, that means we are missing out to measure pretty much all optimizations that are about reducing the number of hits to read/write to the database.
In other words, if some optimizations save e.g. two hits to the DB we will barely see any difference in the benchmarks as data updates in-memory are just super fast compared to the actual cost when we hit the disk (which will be the case with something like LevelDB.
How can it be fixed
Run at least some benchmarks against LevelDB. I say some because the one argument against this, is that it will increase our CI times.
Issue Analytics
- State:
- Created 5 years ago
- Comments:10 (10 by maintainers)
Top Results From Across the Web
Top Related Medium Post
Top Related StackOverflow Question
Troubleshoot Live Code
Top Related Reddit Thread
Top Related Hackernoon Post
Top Related Tweet
Top Related Dev.to Post
Top Related Hashnode Post
@carver This has happened twice over the weekend, I opened a github support issue as it doesn’t seam reasonable for circle CI to be rate limited for this (and I suspect they should be able to increase their cap).
It’s less about the actual benchmark performance and more about making sure the benchmarks work.