Skip to content

feat: iterative execution patched array#7345

Merged
robert3005 merged 2 commits intodevelopfrom
ji/iter-exe-2
Apr 9, 2026
Merged

feat: iterative execution patched array#7345
robert3005 merged 2 commits intodevelopfrom
ji/iter-exe-2

Conversation

@joseph-isaacs
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs commented Apr 8, 2026 •
edited
Loading

Use iterative execute require_child to execute its children.

We should look into a better API to access slots. I am working on this

@joseph-isaacs
wip
9c099bb 
Signed-off-by: Joe Isaacs <joe.isaacs@live.co.uk>
@joseph-isaacs
fix
a763197 
Signed-off-by: Joe Isaacs <joe.isaacs@live.co.uk>
@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs added the changelog/performance A performance improvement label Apr 9, 2026
@codspeed-hq
Copy link
Copy Markdown

codspeed-hq bot commented Apr 9, 2026

Merging this PR will degrade performance by 23.81%

❌ 24 regressed benchmarks
✅ 1098 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 1530 skipped benchmarks1

⚠️ Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

Mode Benchmark BASE HEAD Efficiency
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.005, 1.0)] 2.3 ms 3.1 ms -23.81%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.005, 0.1)] 247.1 µs 320 µs -22.8%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.01, 0.05)] 142.6 µs 179.1 µs -20.4%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.005, 0.05)] 131.5 µs 168.1 µs -21.74%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.01, 1.0)] 2.5 ms 3.3 ms -22.34%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.1, 1.0)] 3.5 ms 4.3 ms -17.11%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.01, 0.1)] 267.8 µs 340.8 µs -21.41%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.005, 0.5)] 1.2 ms 1.5 ms -23.68%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.1, 0.05)] 212.4 µs 249 µs -14.68%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.01, 0.5)] 1.3 ms 1.6 ms -22.22%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.1, 0.5)] 1.8 ms 2.2 ms -16.95%
❌ Simulation take_search_chunked[(0.005, 0.05)] 165.9 µs 196.9 µs -15.77%
❌ Simulation take_search[(0.1, 0.1)] 386.5 µs 459.5 µs -15.89%
❌ Simulation take_search_chunked[(0.01, 0.5)] 1.6 ms 1.9 ms -15.98%
❌ Simulation take_search_chunked[(0.005, 1.0)] 3 ms 3.6 ms -17.12%
❌ Simulation take_search_chunked[(0.005, 0.5)] 1.5 ms 1.8 ms -17.03%
❌ Simulation take_search_chunked[(0.01, 0.05)] 178.8 µs 209.8 µs -14.78%
❌ Simulation take_search_chunked[(0.005, 0.1)] 314.5 µs 376.5 µs -16.46%
❌ Simulation take_search_chunked[(0.1, 0.1)] 450 µs 512 µs -12.12%
❌ Simulation take_search_chunked[(0.01, 1.0)] 3.2 ms 3.9 ms -16.06%
... ... ... ... ... ...

ℹ️ Only the first 20 benchmarks are displayed. Go to the app to view all benchmarks.

Comparing ji/iter-exe-2 (a763197) with develop (a30de02)

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 1530 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩

@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs marked this pull request as ready for review April 9, 2026 10:46
@joseph-isaacs joseph-isaacs requested review from a10y and robert3005 April 9, 2026 10:46
@robert3005 robert3005 merged commit 77c8e95 into develop Apr 9, 2026
65 of 67 checks passed
@robert3005 robert3005 deleted the ji/iter-exe-2 branch April 9, 2026 13:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@robert3005 robert3005 robert3005 approved these changes

@a10y a10y Awaiting requested review from a10y

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

changelog/performance A performance improvement

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@joseph-isaacs @robert3005