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

Node.js Performance Team Meeting 2023-05-29 #85

Closed
mhdawson opened this issue May 24, 2023 · 5 comments · Fixed by #87
Closed

Node.js Performance Team Meeting 2023-05-29 #85

mhdawson opened this issue May 24, 2023 · 5 comments · Fixed by #87
Assignees

Comments

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member

Time

UTC Mon 29-May-2023 17:00 (05:00 PM):

Timezone Date/Time
US / Pacific Mon 29-May-2023 10:00 (10:00 AM)
US / Mountain Mon 29-May-2023 11:00 (11:00 AM)
US / Central Mon 29-May-2023 12:00 (12:00 PM)
US / Eastern Mon 29-May-2023 13:00 (01:00 PM)
EU / Western Mon 29-May-2023 18:00 (06:00 PM)
EU / Central Mon 29-May-2023 19:00 (07:00 PM)
EU / Eastern Mon 29-May-2023 20:00 (08:00 PM)
Moscow Mon 29-May-2023 20:00 (08:00 PM)
Chennai Mon 29-May-2023 22:30 (10:30 PM)
Hangzhou Tue 30-May-2023 01:00 (01:00 AM)
Tokyo Tue 30-May-2023 02:00 (02:00 AM)
Sydney Tue 30-May-2023 03:00 (03:00 AM)

Or in your local time:

Links

Agenda

Extracted from performance-agenda labelled issues and pull requests from the nodejs org prior to the meeting.

nodejs/performance

  • Performance of WHATWG ReadableStream.read() #82
  • Improve legacy CJS resolve #73
  • MakeCallback is very slow #24
  • fetch #11

Invited

  • Performance team: @nodejs/performance

Observers/Guests

Notes

The agenda comes from issues labelled with performance-agenda across all of the repositories in the nodejs org. Please label any additional issues that should be on the agenda before the meeting starts.

Joining the meeting

@mhdawson mhdawson self-assigned this May 24, 2023
@tniessen
Copy link
Member

While it might not exactly be an achievement of this particular team, nodejs/node#48078 might still be worth mentioning during the announcements since it might be one of the most impactful performance improvements in a long time (thanks to @santigimeno and @bnoordhuis).

@santigimeno
Copy link
Member

thanks to @santigimeno and @bnoordhuis

Thanks for the mention but I would rephrase this a bit.

Thanks to @bnoordhuis and @isc-projects which iiuc sponsored some of his work.

@kvakil
Copy link

kvakil commented May 26, 2023

I'd like to mention that startup has gotten a good bit faster in the most recent release (v20.1.0 -> v20.2.0), as a result of nodejs/node#47055+nodejs/node#47144+nodejs/node#47958:

                                                                                     confidence improvement accuracy (*)   (**)  (***)
misc/startup.js count=30 mode='process' script='benchmark/fixtures/require-builtins'        ***     23.94 %       ±0.64% ±0.88% ±1.20%
misc/startup.js count=30 mode='process' script='test/fixtures/semicolon'                    ***     17.58 %       ±0.43% ±0.61% ±0.85%
misc/startup.js count=30 mode='worker' script='benchmark/fixtures/require-builtins'         ***     28.64 %       ±0.47% ±0.66% ±0.91%
misc/startup.js count=30 mode='worker' script='test/fixtures/semicolon'                     ***     24.70 %       ±0.88% ±1.25% ±1.81%

Be aware that when doing many comparisons the risk of a false-positive result increases.
In this case, there are 4 comparisons, you can thus expect the following amount of false-positive results:
  0.20 false positives, when considering a   5% risk acceptance (*, **, ***),
  0.04 false positives, when considering a   1% risk acceptance (**, ***),
  0.00 false positives, when considering a 0.1% risk acceptance (***)

I am working on some further improvements too.

@ronag
Copy link
Member

ronag commented May 29, 2023

De we have a meeting today?

@anonrig
Copy link
Member

anonrig commented May 29, 2023

De we have a meeting today?

I was couple of minutes late, but I'm here.

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 a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants