Skip to content
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

Switching out flurry for more read-heavy performance #191

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lordsarcastic
Copy link
Collaborator

No description provided.

@lordsarcastic lordsarcastic linked an issue Jan 31, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
@lordsarcastic lordsarcastic marked this pull request as draft January 31, 2025 23:29
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 31, 2025

Test Results

0 tests   - 163   0 ✅  - 163   0s ⏱️ - 3m 57s
0 suites  -   8   0 💤 ±  0 
0 files    -   2   0 ❌ ±  0 

Results for commit 5f798b4. ± Comparison against base commit 7f7987b.

♻️ This comment has been updated with latest results.

Copy link

Benchmark Results

group                                                        main                                   pr
-----                                                        ----                                   --
store_batch_insertion_without_predicates/size_100            1.08   795.0±10.18µs        ? ?/sec    1.00    737.4±2.11µs        ? ?/sec
store_batch_insertion_without_predicates/size_1000           1.08      6.7±0.10ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      6.2±0.04ms        ? ?/sec
store_batch_insertion_without_predicates/size_10000          1.04     86.6±0.52ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     83.5±0.24ms        ? ?/sec
store_batch_insertion_without_predicates/size_100000         1.02    884.6±4.61ms        ? ?/sec    1.00   865.6±12.21ms        ? ?/sec
store_retrieval_no_condition/size_100                        1.03      2.3±0.03ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      2.2±0.01ms        ? ?/sec
store_retrieval_no_condition/size_1000                       1.04     16.0±0.43ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     15.4±0.03ms        ? ?/sec
store_retrieval_no_condition/size_10000                      1.05    155.9±1.96ms        ? ?/sec    1.00    147.9±2.88ms        ? ?/sec
store_retrieval_no_condition/size_100000                     1.05  1548.9±25.31ms        ? ?/sec    1.00   1473.1±6.77ms        ? ?/sec
store_retrieval_non_linear_kdtree/size_100                   1.09      2.4±0.06ms        ? ?/sec    1.00      2.2±0.01ms        ? ?/sec
store_retrieval_non_linear_kdtree/size_1000                  1.04     16.3±0.21ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     15.6±0.10ms        ? ?/sec
store_retrieval_non_linear_kdtree/size_10000                 1.06    163.1±2.70ms        ? ?/sec    1.00    154.4±1.05ms        ? ?/sec
store_retrieval_non_linear_kdtree/size_100000                1.03   1625.6±2.43ms        ? ?/sec    1.00  1571.5±12.42ms        ? ?/sec
store_sequential_insertion_without_predicates/size_100       1.06   1620.0±5.01µs        ? ?/sec    1.00  1531.1±19.52µs        ? ?/sec
store_sequential_insertion_without_predicates/size_1000      1.07     15.6±0.03ms        ? ?/sec    1.00     14.6±0.27ms        ? ?/sec
store_sequential_insertion_without_predicates/size_10000     1.08    156.5±0.28ms        ? ?/sec    1.00    145.4±3.04ms        ? ?/sec
store_sequential_insertion_without_predicates/size_100000    1.07  1564.9±31.39ms        ? ?/sec    1.00  1468.4±18.57ms        ? ?/sec

@deven96
Copy link
Owner

deven96 commented Feb 4, 2025

Errors here should be fixed upon merge of this

@deven96 deven96 self-requested a review February 4, 2025 14:19
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Switching out flurry for more read-heavy performance
2 participants