Skip to content

test(orchestration): guard wide catalog listing with a same-run ratio - #1352

Merged
kvlonge merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
test/catalog-guard-ratio
Nov 7, 2026
Merged

kvlonge merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
test/catalog-guard-ratio

Conversation

@kvlonge

@kvlonge kvlonge commented Nov 7, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Why

The catalog listing guard for a 3,000-node target required a fixed median under 450 ms. Hosted runners exceed that through runner speed alone: 480–530 ms on three unrelated pull requests, for code that lists in about 210 ms locally. Absolute budgets on hosted runners are not a reliable regression signal, so it failed CI without any code change.

Changes

  • The guard now lists the wide target at 1,000 and at 3,000 nodes in the same run and requires the 3,000-node median to stay under six times the 1,000-node median. Linear listing measures about 3×; a quadratic listing would measure about 9×.
  • Every listed node is still checked to keep its own build, and the 200,000-row history guard is unchanged.

Verification

  • cargo test -p sqlbuild-orchestration --lib test_catalog_reads on SQLite and PostgreSQL, three runs each: ratios 2.6–3.3 at load average 2.4 on 8 cores.
  • make check-ci passes locally.

DuckShop: not applicable; this changes a control-store test's timing check, with no project shape, data value or lifecycle sequence.

The 3,000-node listing guard used a fixed 450 ms median, which hosted runners
exceed by runner speed alone (480-530 ms on code that lists in about 210 ms
locally). It now times the listing at 1,000 and 3,000 nodes in the same run
and requires the larger listing to stay within six times the smaller: linear
listing measures about three times, quadratic about nine.
@kvlonge
kvlonge enabled auto-merge (squash) November 7, 2026 18:23
@kvlonge
kvlonge merged commit cebdfdc into main Nov 7, 2026
49 checks passed
@kvlonge
kvlonge deleted the test/catalog-guard-ratio branch November 7, 2026 19:53
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