Skip to content

Backend: Server-Sent Events for handlers - #6218

Open
shai-almog wants to merge 4 commits into
masterfrom
backend-sse
Open

shai-almog wants to merge 4 commits into
masterfrom
backend-sse

Conversation

@shai-almog

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Handlers can now answer with an event stream, for LLM-proxy and live-feed endpoints where a WebSocket is more than the job needs:

return Sse.stream(request, events -> {
    for (String token : model.tokens(prompt)) events.data(token);   // on the wire now
    events.event("done").data("{}");
});

What it is

  • Sse (vm/backend/src/com/codename1/backend/Sse.java) builds on the existing Response.stream, which already does chunked HTTP/1.1, close-delimited HTTP/1.0 and flow-controlled HTTP/2. It adds the event-stream framing:
    • data, json, event, id, retry, comment and ping(), each flushed as soon as it is written.
    • lastEventId(), so a reconnecting client resumes where it left off.
    • Cache-Control: no-cache and X-Accel-Buffering: no, so nginx does not hold events back.
    • Multi-line data is split on CR, LF and CRLF. A line break in event or id, or a NUL in id, is refused, so a value cannot forge an extra field.
  • It uses the blocking-producer model: the producer runs on the request's worker until it returns. A cross-thread SseEmitter is out of scope, because the hand-off would need Object.wait on a virtual thread, which blocks the host.

Fixes found on the way

  • Compression: with compression on, a zero minimum and a matching type, a streamed response could be sent with Content-Encoding: gzip over identity bytes. Streamed responses are never compressed now.
  • HttpProxy: it relayed an upstream event stream only when its 16 KB buffer filled, so a proxied token feed reached the client minutes late. It now flushes after every read for text/event-stream and for bodies of undeclared length. Downloads with a declared length keep sending full 16 KB chunks.

Tests

SseTest covers:

  • the framing and the refused field values.
  • real sockets, direct and through HttpProxy: the producer does not write its second event until the client has read the first, so any buffering times the test out.
  • Last-Event-ID passed through the proxy.
  • the compression guard.

Docs

A "Server-Sent Events" subsection in Backend-Web.asciidoc, with a live-feed demo in Streaming.java.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

shai-almog and others added 3 commits November 11, 2026 20:11
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
…ared lengths

available() is always 0 on both Web impls, so the previous guard flushed
every read of every download.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Developer Guide build artifacts are available for download from this workflow run:

Developer Guide quality checks:

  • AsciiDoc linter: No issues found (report)
  • Vale: No alerts found (report)
  • Paragraph capitalization: No paragraph capitalization issues (report)
  • LanguageTool: No grammar matches (report)
  • Image references: No unused images detected (report)

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Cloudflare Preview

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

✅ Continuous Quality Report

Test & Coverage

Static Analysis

  • SpotBugs [Report archive]
    • ✅ ByteCodeTranslator: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ android: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ android-compat: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ android-res-compiler: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ backend: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ backend-test: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ build-engine: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ build-hint-catalog: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ build-hint-tools: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ codenameone-gradle-plugin: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ codenameone-maven-plugin: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ compose-compat: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ core-unittests: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ desktop-compat-runtime: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ fxml-compiler: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ ios: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ javac: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ javafx-compat: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ project-model: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ python-runtime: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ python-transpiler: 0 findings (no issues)
    • ✅ swing-compat: 0 findings (no issues)
  • ✅ PMD: 0 findings (no issues) [Report archive]
  • ✅ Checkstyle: 0 findings (no issues) [Report archive]

Generated automatically by the PR CI workflow.

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 210 screenshots: 210 matched.
Native Windows port (x64 / Intel-AMD): full hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered offscreen with Direct2D/DirectWrite, plus the real benchmarks (base64 native/CN1/SIMD, image createMask/applyMask/modifyAlpha/PNG/JPEG, SSE2 SIMD kernels). Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric Duration
SIMD kernel backend SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300) java 26ms / native 3ms = 8.6x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300) java 26ms / native 2ms = 13.0x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size 8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations 6000
Base64 SIMD byte path gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode 39.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode 48.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode 50.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.282x (28.2% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode 50.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.042x (4.2% slower)
Image encode benchmark iterations 100
Image createMask (SIMD off) 4.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on) 4.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 1.000x (0.0% slower)
Image applyMask (SIMD off) 19.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on) 10.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.526x (47.4% faster)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off) 16.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on) 11.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.688x (31.3% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off) 17.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on) 7.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.412x (58.8% faster)

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Windows x64

Runner CPU: AMD64 Family 26 Model 2 Stepping 1, AuthenticAMD (baseline windows-x64@amd64-family-26-model-2-authenticamd)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 20% (time) / 25% (RAM) above its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ is a regression and fails; one that far below is an improvement, reported but not failed (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark Cores Time RAM Status
hello (WinHelloMain) 4 1.99x (base 1.41x, +41.1%) 0.67x (base 0.68x, -1.9%) ok
translator (self) 4 0.90x (base 0.90x, -0.0%) 0.50x (base 0.47x, +7.2%) ok
intArithmetic 4 1.00x (base 0.99x, +0.6%) 0.06x (base 0.05x, +2.8%) ok
longArithmetic 4 0.99x (base 0.99x, +0.5%) 0.06x (base 0.05x, +3.1%) ok
mathTranscendental 4 0.93x (base 0.94x, -0.8%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +2.7%) ok
arraySequential 4 1.77x (base 1.75x, +1.5%) 0.38x (base 0.38x, +0.2%) ok
arrayRandom 4 1.02x (base 1.00x, +1.7%) 0.23x (base 0.23x, -0.4%) ok
objectAllocation 4 1.54x (base 1.65x, -6.2%) 0.26x (base 0.21x, +22.9%) ok
valueEscape 4 0.10x (base 0.10x, -0.1%) 0.05x (base 0.04x, +2.9%) ok
hashMapChurn 4 1.59x (base 1.59x, -0.2%) 0.09x (base 0.09x, -0.5%) ok
stringBuilding 4 1.42x (base 1.39x, +2.1%) 0.32x (base 0.27x, +20.9%) ok
recursion 4 1.42x (base 1.44x, -1.6%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +3.2%) ok
quicksort 4 1.06x (base 1.06x, +0.5%) 0.12x (base 0.12x, +1.6%) ok

Result: no regression

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 210 screenshots: 210 matched.
Native Windows port (arm64 / Apple Silicon - Arm): full hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered offscreen with Direct2D/DirectWrite, plus the real benchmarks (base64 native/CN1/SIMD, image createMask/applyMask/modifyAlpha/PNG/JPEG, NEON SIMD kernels). Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric Duration
SIMD kernel backend SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300) java 53ms / native 3ms = 17.6x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300) java 54ms / native 2ms = 27.0x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size 8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations 6000
Base64 SIMD byte path gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode 76.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode 82.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode 91.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.197x (19.7% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode 74.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 0.902x (9.8% faster)
Image encode benchmark iterations 100
Image createMask (SIMD off) 6.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on) 1.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.167x (83.3% faster)
Image applyMask (SIMD off) 15.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on) 15.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 1.000x (0.0% slower)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off) 15.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on) 10.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.667x (33.3% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off) 20.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on) 9.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.450x (55.0% faster)

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Windows arm64

Runner CPU: ARMv8 (64-bit) Family 8 Model D49 Revision 0, MICROSOFT CORPORATION (baseline windows-arm64@armv8-64-bit-family-8-model-d49-microsoft-corporation)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 20% (time) / 25% (RAM) above its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ is a regression and fails; one that far below is an improvement, reported but not failed (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark Cores Time RAM Status
hello (WinHelloMain) 4 1.50x (base 1.45x, +3.9%) 0.77x (base 0.75x, +2.8%) ok
translator (self) 4 0.90x (base 0.84x, +7.7%) 0.49x (base 0.51x, -3.9%) ok
intArithmetic 4 1.04x (base 1.04x, +0.0%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +3.1%) ok
longArithmetic 4 0.79x (base 0.80x, -0.1%) 0.06x (base 0.06x, +3.5%) ok
mathTranscendental 4 0.73x (base 0.72x, +1.7%) 0.07x (base 0.06x, +1.9%) ok
arraySequential 4 0.40x (base 0.46x, -13.0%) 0.39x (base 0.39x, -0.0%) ok
arrayRandom 4 0.95x (base 0.94x, +1.1%) 0.23x (base 0.23x, +0.3%) ok
objectAllocation 4 1.81x (base 1.82x, -0.6%) 0.41x (base 0.43x, -5.6%) ok
valueEscape 4 0.76x (base 0.76x, +0.1%) 0.05x (base 0.05x, +3.4%) ok
hashMapChurn 4 1.00x (base 0.98x, +1.2%) 0.12x (base 0.12x, -2.3%) ok
stringBuilding 4 1.54x (base 1.43x, +7.7%) 0.27x (base 0.27x, -0.1%) ok
recursion 4 1.42x (base 1.46x, -3.0%) 0.07x (base 0.07x, +1.5%) ok
quicksort 4 1.01x (base 1.00x, +0.7%) 0.12x (base 0.12x, +0.7%) ok

Result: no regression

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 231 screenshots: 231 matched.
✅ JavaScript-port screenshot tests passed.

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 195 screenshots: 195 matched.

Native Android coverage

  • 📊 Line coverage: 19.18% (56169/292885 lines covered) [HTML preview] (artifact android-coverage-report, jacocoAndroidReport/html/index.html)
    • Other counters: instruction 18.13% (270601/1492353), branch 12.38% (19677/158943), complexity 10.36% (15847/153017), method 15.74% (11411/72518), class 27.93% (2247/8045)
    • Lowest covered classes
      • kotlin.collections.unsigned.kotlin.collections.unsigned.UArraysKt___UArraysKt – 0.00% (0/2396 lines covered)
      • org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.ClassReader – 0.00% (0/1524 lines covered)
      • androidx.compose.runtime.androidx.compose.runtime.LinkComposer – 0.00% (0/1430 lines covered)
      • org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.MethodWriter – 0.00% (0/922 lines covered)
      • kotlinx.coroutines.channels.kotlinx.coroutines.channels.BufferedChannel – 0.00% (0/863 lines covered)
      • kotlin.sequences.kotlin.sequences.SequencesKt___SequencesKt – 0.00% (0/744 lines covered)
      • com.google.common.cache.com.google.common.cache.LocalCache$Segment – 0.00% (0/726 lines covered)
      • okio.okio.Buffer – 0.00% (0/687 lines covered)
      • kotlin.text.kotlin.text.StringsKt___StringsKt – 0.00% (0/630 lines covered)
      • com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.TextXmlPullParser – 0.00% (0/623 lines covered)

✅ Native Android screenshot tests passed.

Native Android coverage

  • 📊 Line coverage: 19.18% (56169/292885 lines covered) [HTML preview] (artifact android-coverage-report, jacocoAndroidReport/html/index.html)
    • Other counters: instruction 18.13% (270601/1492353), branch 12.38% (19677/158943), complexity 10.36% (15847/153017), method 15.74% (11411/72518), class 27.93% (2247/8045)
    • Lowest covered classes
      • kotlin.collections.unsigned.kotlin.collections.unsigned.UArraysKt___UArraysKt – 0.00% (0/2396 lines covered)
      • org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.ClassReader – 0.00% (0/1524 lines covered)
      • androidx.compose.runtime.androidx.compose.runtime.LinkComposer – 0.00% (0/1430 lines covered)
      • org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.org.jacoco.agent.rt.internal_0e20598.asm.MethodWriter – 0.00% (0/922 lines covered)
      • kotlinx.coroutines.channels.kotlinx.coroutines.channels.BufferedChannel – 0.00% (0/863 lines covered)
      • kotlin.sequences.kotlin.sequences.SequencesKt___SequencesKt – 0.00% (0/744 lines covered)
      • com.google.common.cache.com.google.common.cache.LocalCache$Segment – 0.00% (0/726 lines covered)
      • okio.okio.Buffer – 0.00% (0/687 lines covered)
      • kotlin.text.kotlin.text.StringsKt___StringsKt – 0.00% (0/630 lines covered)
      • com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.com.codename1.androidcompat.rt.TextXmlPullParser – 0.00% (0/623 lines covered)

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric Duration
SIMD kernel backend scalar fallback (no native SIMD)
SIMD int-add (64K x300) java 156ms / native 76ms = 2.0x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300) java 239ms / native 131ms = 1.8x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 payload size 8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations 6000
Base64 SIMD byte path gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode 77.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode 85.000 ms
Base64 native encode 494.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (CN1/native) 0.156x (84.4% faster)
Base64 native decode 317.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (CN1/native) 0.268x (73.2% faster)
Image encode benchmark status skipped (SIMD unsupported)

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Nov 11, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 210 screenshots: 210 matched.
Native Windows port, REAL shipping pipeline: the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a binary CROSS-COMPILED on Linux (clang-cl + xwin, WebView2 linked) and RUN on a Windows x64 runner. Compared against the in-repo baseline in scripts/windows/screenshots.

Benchmark Results

Detailed Performance Metrics

Metric Duration
SIMD kernel backend SSE2 (x64) / NEON (arm64) native kernels
SIMD int-add (64K x300) java 57ms / native 4ms = 14.2x speedup
SIMD float-mul (64K x300) java 56ms / native 5ms = 11.2x speedup
SIMD kernel correctness PASS (native result == scalar reference)
Base64 native bridge unavailable (CN1 + SIMD + image benchmarks only)
Base64 payload size 8192 bytes
Base64 benchmark iterations 6000
Base64 SIMD byte path gated to scalar (CPU autovectorizes scalar; explicit SIMD not beneficial here)
Base64 CN1 encode 80.000 ms
Base64 CN1 decode 109.000 ms
Base64 SIMD encode 111.000 ms
Base64 encode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 1.388x (38.7% slower)
Base64 SIMD decode 107.000 ms
Base64 decode ratio (SIMD/CN1) 0.982x (1.8% faster)
Image encode benchmark iterations 100
Image createMask (SIMD off) 9.000 ms
Image createMask (SIMD on) 4.000 ms
Image createMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.444x (55.6% faster)
Image applyMask (SIMD off) 31.000 ms
Image applyMask (SIMD on) 27.000 ms
Image applyMask ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.871x (12.9% faster)
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD off) 27.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha (SIMD on) 15.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.556x (44.4% faster)
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD off) 33.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor (SIMD on) 19.000 ms
Image modifyAlpha removeColor ratio (SIMD on/off) 0.576x (42.4% faster)

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Nov 12, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 210 screenshots: 210 matched.
Native Linux port (x64), GTK3/Cairo/Pango, ParparVM bytecode-to-C (no JVM): the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a native ELF built + run on the GitHub x64 runner. Baseline: scripts/linux/screenshots.

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Linux x64

Runner CPU: Intel(R) Xeon(R) Platinum 8370C CPU @ 2.80GHz (baseline linux-x64@intel-xeon-platinum-8370c)

1 performance regression:

  • translator (self) on all 4 CPUs: time 0.66x against a 0.53x baseline (+24.4%, tolerance 20%)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 20% (time) / 25% (RAM) above its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ is a regression and fails; one that far below is an improvement, reported but not failed (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark Cores Time RAM Status
hello (LinuxHelloMain) 4 1.14x (base 0.90x, +27.0%) 0.78x (base 0.78x, -0.8%) ok
translator (self) 4 0.66x (base 0.53x, +24.4%) 0.48x (base 0.43x, +12.0%) REGRESSION (time +24.4%)
intArithmetic 4 1.03x (base 1.03x, +0.0%) 0.04x (base 0.06x, -30.7%) ok
longArithmetic 4 1.01x (base 1.01x, +0.0%) 0.04x (base 0.05x, -29.9%) ok
mathTranscendental 4 1.03x (base 1.03x, -0.2%) 0.04x (base 0.06x, -26.5%) ok
arraySequential 4 2.23x (base 2.52x, -11.6%) 0.36x (base 0.35x, +1.0%) ok
arrayRandom 4 1.03x (base 1.01x, +1.9%) 0.20x (base 0.21x, -5.7%) ok
objectAllocation 4 1.14x (base 1.21x, -5.3%) 0.39x (base 0.50x, -22.3%) ok
valueEscape 4 0.13x (base 0.13x, +0.3%) 0.03x (base 0.04x, -34.0%) ok
hashMapChurn 4 0.85x (base 1.09x, -22.5%) 0.11x (base 0.10x, +8.7%) ok
stringBuilding 4 1.55x (base 1.56x, -0.5%) 0.26x (base 0.26x, +1.3%) ok
recursion 4 1.30x (base 1.30x, -0.2%) 0.04x (base 0.07x, -47.5%) ok
quicksort 4 1.06x (base 1.06x, +0.2%) 0.10x (base 0.13x, -21.9%) ok

A change that moves performance ON PURPOSE records the new baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/pr/6218.json, with the reason, from this job's perf-results.json. The rebaseline is then part of this pull request's diff:

python3 vm/selfhost/calibrate-perf-baseline.py --pr 6218 --reason "<why these benchmarks moved>" perf-results.json

Result: performance regression

@shai-almog

shai-almog commented Nov 12, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Compared 210 screenshots: 210 matched.
Native Linux port (arm64), GTK3/Cairo/Pango, ParparVM bytecode-to-C (no JVM): the hellocodenameone screenshot suite rendered by a native ELF built + run on the GitHub arm64 runner. Baseline: scripts/linux/screenshots-arm.

ParparVM vs HotSpot (JDK 25): Linux arm64

Runner CPU: Neoverse-N2 (baseline linux-arm64@neoverse-n2)

Ratios are ParparVM / JDK 25: below 1.00x ParparVM is faster (time) or smaller (RAM). Median of 5 interleaved, paired rounds; every run's output was verified. A ratio more than 20% (time) / 25% (RAM) above its baseline in vm/selfhost/perf-baseline/ is a regression and fails; one that far below is an improvement, reported but not failed (a row whose calibration runs were noisier carries a wider tolerance), and for RAM the change must also exceed 0.05x in absolute terms. Both run unpinned on all of the runner's CPUs, with their own default thread counts.

Benchmark Cores Time RAM Status
hello (LinuxHelloMain) 4 1.16x (base 1.02x, +13.2%) 0.78x (base 0.66x, +18.2%) ok
translator (self) 4 0.78x (base 0.70x, +11.7%) 0.45x (base 0.43x, +4.7%) ok
intArithmetic 4 1.04x (base 1.04x, -0.0%) 0.03x (base 0.03x, +4.8%) ok
longArithmetic 4 0.79x (base 0.79x, -0.3%) 0.03x (base 0.03x, +5.2%) ok
mathTranscendental 4 1.09x (base 1.10x, -0.3%) 0.04x (base 0.03x, +9.5%) ok
arraySequential 4 0.36x (base 0.36x, -0.2%) 0.37x (base 0.37x, +0.2%) ok
arrayRandom 4 0.94x (base 0.94x, -0.0%) 0.20x (base 0.20x, +0.7%) ok
objectAllocation 4 1.96x (base 1.77x, +10.8%) 0.38x (base 0.37x, +2.4%) ok
valueEscape 4 0.51x (base 0.51x, -0.1%) 0.03x (base 0.03x, +5.7%) ok
hashMapChurn 4 0.84x (base 0.84x, +0.3%) 0.12x (base 0.12x, +2.8%) ok
stringBuilding 4 1.49x (base 1.57x, -4.8%) 0.26x (base 0.26x, -0.1%) ok
recursion 4 1.55x (base 1.43x, +7.8%) 0.04x (base 0.04x, +3.3%) ok
quicksort 4 1.00x (base 0.99x, +0.6%) 0.10x (base 0.09x, +2.6%) ok

Result: no regression

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
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.

1 participant