-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.5k
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Browse files
Browse the repository at this point in the history
* Remove a type restriction in Base.QuadGK.Segment (#19626) * Test compatibility of quadgk with unitful numbers / physical quantities. * Pare down tests. * More test refinements.
- Loading branch information
1 parent
44d7677
commit c428a5f
Showing
2 changed files
with
27 additions
and
1 deletion.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
This file contains 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
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Executing the daily benchmark build, I will reply here when finished:
@nanosoldier
runbenchmarks(ALL, isdaily = true)
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here. cc @jrevels
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Does this look a bit weird? So many at exactly 0.5 ratio.
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe an artifact of a change in code layout?
Let's see what happens if we run it again. Note that this will execute two runs, one after the other, and compare their results, as opposed to executing a single run then comparing against the previous day's results.
@nanosoldier
runbenchmarks(ALL, vs = "@f27c6f3ae50b45e0e6ff2305dd5031d07c8665a7")
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Your benchmark job has completed - possible performance regressions were detected. A full report can be found here. cc @jrevels
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, at least it's consistent.
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Hehe OK then. I was just surprised with the number of quite different benchmarks that exactly got 2x faster.
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Still doesn't make sense. This patch does not touch any code that is used by BaseBenchmarks.
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is a daily benchmark so perhaps #17057?
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Cant be.. Improvements are on very basic operations as well.
c428a5f
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Like how could
isinteger
onBigFloat
get a factor of 2 faster?