-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10.5k
Set form options for form-based request types #50016
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
Conversation
|
/benchmark plaintext aspnet-citrine-lin kestrel |
|
/benchmarks |
|
Crank Pull Request Bot
Benchmarks:
Profiles:
Components:
Arguments: any additional arguments to pass through to crank, e.g. |
|
/benchmark plaintext aspnet-citrine-lin kestrel |
|
Benchmark started for plaintext on aspnet-citrine-lin with kestrel. Logs: link |
|
/benchmark plaintext_endpoint aspnet-citrine-lin kestrel |
|
Benchmark started for plaintext_endpoint on aspnet-citrine-lin with kestrel. Logs: link |
|
@sebastienros Does the bot not write a comment with results anymore? @captainsafia The "platform" benchmarks don't use Routing so won't show any difference here. The "mvcjsoninput2k" benchmark might show a small difference, ~615k on main -> ~625k a couple days ago; if I'm looking at the correct benchmark on the dashboard. |
Yes, @sebastienros and I were discussing last night that there's currently no way for us to test PRs with changes in the routing layer. Using the It's apparently straightforward to add support for a new component type so I'll try but in the meantime I'll also run them locally. Update: see aspnet/Benchmarks#1885. |
src/Shared/HttpExtensions.cs
Outdated
| HttpMethods.IsPost(method) || HttpMethods.IsPut(method) || HttpMethods.IsPatch(method); | ||
|
|
||
| internal static bool IsValidContentTypeForForm(string? contentType) => | ||
| MediaTypeHeaderValue.TryParse(contentType, out var mediaType) && |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This allocates, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Mmmm, yeah, and we would be paying the cost here for most requests (POST, PUT). I think I can cook up something better here.
|
|
/benchmark plaintext_endpoint aspnet-citrine-lin routing |
|
Benchmark started for plaintext_endpoint on aspnet-citrine-lin with routing. Logs: link |
|
/benchmark plaintext_endpoint aspnet-citrine-lin routing |
|
Benchmark started for plaintext_endpoint on aspnet-citrine-lin with routing. Logs: link |
|
/benchmark plaintext_endpoint aspnet-citrine-lin routing |
|
Benchmark started for plaintext_endpoint on aspnet-citrine-lin with routing. Logs: link |
|
/benchmark plaintext_endpoint aspnet-citrine-lin routing |
|
Benchmark started for plaintext_endpoint on aspnet-citrine-lin with routing. Logs: link |
plaintext_endpoint - aspnet-citrine-lin
|
|
Bump for reviews! |
sebastienros
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Perf numbers are back to before the regression
|
Not part of this PR but we need to understand the overhead of requests that POST requests that are not form and POST requests that are forms. |
I'll take a stab at adding benchmarks in-repo for this. |
|
We should probably track the perf of simple POST requests to detect regressions in the code that is completely excluded in GETs. |
Part of #50008.