[Fix] Accept benchmarks when block_allocation is faster than the processpoolexecutor

[jan-janssen]

It's not a bug it is just a fix to improve the continuous integration stability.

Summary by CodeRabbit

• Tests
  • Updated benchmark timing test expectations to accept multiple valid timing entry configurations as minimum values, increasing test flexibility while preserving all other validation checks.

[coderabbitai]

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This pull request modifies a test assertion in the benchmark test suite. The change updates a timing validation to accept either "process" or "block_allocation" as the minimum timing entry, making the test expectation more flexible while preserving all other assertions.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
Test Expectation Update tests/benchmark/test_results.py	Modified test assertion to allow either "process" or "block_allocation" as the minimum timing entry instead of strictly requiring "process".

Estimated code review effort

🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~3 minutes

Poem

🐰 A test that once was rigid and tight,
Now bends with grace, both left and right,
"Process" or "block"—the choice is yours,
Hopping through benchmarks opens new doors! 🚪✨

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 0.00% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly describes the main change: updating benchmark test expectations to accept alternative timing entries (block_allocation vs process). It directly relates to the file modification in test_results.py.
Merge Conflict Detection	✅ Passed	✅ No merge conflicts detected when merging into main

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing touches

• 📝 Generate docstrings

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests
• Post copyable unit tests in a comment
• Commit unit tests in branch benchmark

---

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 93.75%. Comparing base (7e4a14c) to head (84f58ad).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #917   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   93.75%   93.75%           
=======================================
  Files          38       38           
  Lines        1937     1937           
=======================================
  Hits         1816     1816           
  Misses        121      121           

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.