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

Change RequestInfo to be a NamedTuple to improve performances #9692

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Nov 7, 2024

Conversation

bdraco
Copy link
Member

@bdraco bdraco commented Nov 7, 2024

closes #9504

2.7x faster creating the RequestInfo... 6.16% improvement in send performance

Screenshot 2024-11-06 at 9 51 27 PM

skipping backport to 3.10 like we did with #9365 (similar change)

Copy link

codspeed-hq bot commented Nov 7, 2024

CodSpeed Performance Report

Merging #9692 will not alter performance

Comparing request_info (6038c83) with master (dd0b6e3)

Summary

✅ 14 untouched benchmarks

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 7, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 98.67%. Comparing base (dd0b6e3) to head (6038c83).
Report is 1 commits behind head on master.

✅ All tests successful. No failed tests found.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #9692      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   98.67%   98.67%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         116      116              
  Lines       35733    35732       -1     
  Branches     4238     4237       -1     
==========================================
- Hits        35259    35258       -1     
  Misses        319      319              
  Partials      155      155              
Flag Coverage Δ
CI-GHA 98.55% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
OS-Linux 98.23% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
OS-Windows 96.13% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
OS-macOS 97.43% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
Py-3.10.11 97.28% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.10.15 97.71% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.11.10 97.77% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.11.9 97.36% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️
Py-3.12.7 98.26% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.13.0 98.24% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.9.13 97.20% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-3.9.20 97.63% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
Py-pypy7.3.16 97.25% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
VM-macos 97.43% <100.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️
VM-ubuntu 98.23% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
VM-windows 96.13% <100.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@psf-chronographer psf-chronographer bot added the bot:chronographer:provided There is a change note present in this PR label Nov 7, 2024
@bdraco
Copy link
Member Author

bdraco commented Nov 7, 2024

skipping backport to 3.10 like we did with #9365 (similar change)

@bdraco bdraco added the backport-3.11 Trigger automatic backporting to the 3.11 release branch by Patchback robot label Nov 7, 2024
@bdraco bdraco changed the title DNM: Benchmark performance of making RequestInfo a NamedTuple Change RequestInfo to be a NamedTuple to improve performances Nov 7, 2024
@bdraco bdraco changed the title Change RequestInfo to be a NamedTuple to improve performances Change RequestInfo to be a NamedTuple to improve performances Nov 7, 2024
@bdraco bdraco marked this pull request as ready for review November 7, 2024 17:12
@bdraco bdraco enabled auto-merge (squash) November 7, 2024 17:12
@bdraco bdraco merged commit e85db24 into master Nov 7, 2024
38 of 39 checks passed
@bdraco bdraco deleted the request_info branch November 7, 2024 18:52
Copy link
Contributor

patchback bot commented Nov 7, 2024

Backport to 3.11: 💔 cherry-picking failed — conflicts found

❌ Failed to cleanly apply e85db24 on top of patchback/backports/3.11/e85db24d78c01598395ee0d1c16d19bce54118ba/pr-9692

Backporting merged PR #9692 into master

  1. Ensure you have a local repo clone of your fork. Unless you cloned it
    from the upstream, this would be your origin remote.
  2. Make sure you have an upstream repo added as a remote too. In these
    instructions you'll refer to it by the name upstream. If you don't
    have it, here's how you can add it:
    $ git remote add upstream https://github.com/aio-libs/aiohttp.git
  3. Ensure you have the latest copy of upstream and prepare a branch
    that will hold the backported code:
    $ git fetch upstream
    $ git checkout -b patchback/backports/3.11/e85db24d78c01598395ee0d1c16d19bce54118ba/pr-9692 upstream/3.11
  4. Now, cherry-pick PR Change RequestInfo to be a NamedTuple to improve performances #9692 contents into that branch:
    $ git cherry-pick -x e85db24d78c01598395ee0d1c16d19bce54118ba
    If it'll yell at you with something like fatal: Commit e85db24d78c01598395ee0d1c16d19bce54118ba is a merge but no -m option was given., add -m 1 as follows instead:
    $ git cherry-pick -m1 -x e85db24d78c01598395ee0d1c16d19bce54118ba
  5. At this point, you'll probably encounter some merge conflicts. You must
    resolve them in to preserve the patch from PR Change RequestInfo to be a NamedTuple to improve performances #9692 as close to the
    original as possible.
  6. Push this branch to your fork on GitHub:
    $ git push origin patchback/backports/3.11/e85db24d78c01598395ee0d1c16d19bce54118ba/pr-9692
  7. Create a PR, ensure that the CI is green. If it's not — update it so that
    the tests and any other checks pass. This is it!
    Now relax and wait for the maintainers to process your pull request
    when they have some cycles to do reviews. Don't worry — they'll tell you if
    any improvements are necessary when the time comes!

🤖 @patchback
I'm built with octomachinery and
my source is open — https://github.com/sanitizers/patchback-github-app.

bdraco added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 7, 2024
bdraco added a commit that referenced this pull request Nov 7, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport-3.11 Trigger automatic backporting to the 3.11 release branch by Patchback robot bot:chronographer:provided There is a change note present in this PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

RequestInfo is documented to be a namedtuple but its actually a dataclass or attrs
2 participants