Repository navigation
test: tighten fresh-process cache compile budgets - #781
Merged
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why
The fresh-process cache benchmark limits allowed 1.5–1.7x the times CI now records. A regression could have undone most of the recent warm-compile gains and still passed.
Changes
These limits are about 1.25x the slowest time CI recorded for each phase on #779:
The CI maxima behind them are:
The 0.67 warm-to-cold ratio guard is unchanged; CI measured 0.54–0.55. The dense and cold-compile limits were already within 1.04–1.29x of the CI times, so they are unchanged.
Verification
ruff format --checkandruff checkpass on the changed file.