This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 4, 2023. It is now read-only.
Rewrite the indexing benchmarks #315
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I ran the full bench suit on the server and it works so I think we can merge 🎉 |
Kerollmops
approved these changes
Aug 24, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you a lot for this, LGTM!
Note that the panic was related to a real bug in the core #317.
bors merge
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a panic on the benchmark and while I was trying to understand what was happening I decided to rewrite the way the benchmarks were working.
Before we were creating a database with the good setting, and then for each benchmarks we were:
Now for each iteration we recreate entirely a new database from scratch.
Since deleting all the documents in a database may not be the same as starting with a fresh new database I prefer this solution.