-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.2k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Performance Tests: Improve collection and reporting #61450
Conversation
What's the reason for grouping these two in a single PR? |
@Mamaduka I'm trying to port over some of the recent improvements from the WP core tests, having everything in one PR is more manageable for testing. |
This comment was marked as resolved.
This comment was marked as resolved.
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.
Nice! The summary on this PR already looks pretty good. A couple non-blocking observations:
- It would be nice to map the spec names for each table to a more human readable format that were more descriptive (example).
- I would flip columns for
trunk
and the current commit so they are consistent with the before/after format used in other places where we are reporting comparisons. - Using the full commit hash for the header gets pretty long, possibly truncate to 7 characters, which is the default length for most short style SHA-1 hashes or go with the generic "before" and "after" like we do elsewhere.
I think this would require more significant changes . The way the performance reporter is setup, the actual test suite names are not really readable nor unique, nor are the names saved to the result files.
This is actually in line with how the data is saved under the hood and presented on the command line when running tests. See https://github.com/WordPress/gutenberg/actions/runs/8989145786/job/24691572268?pr=61450#step:5:104 for example.
I was thinking about this but this is not guaranteed to be a commit hash. It can also be a branch name or a tag name. Again, the output is the same on command line as well. |
TIL about the job summaries, really nice and avoid digging into the logs. The discoverability is increased a lot without adding huge distracting comments to the PR. Now I wonder if there's a way to make this a little bit more visible in the main PR page or something (a link or something). |
@WordPress/gutenberg-core We should look at adding this summary to the Gutenberg job as well. |
also cc @jsnajdr who has been looking at reducing performance test noise and we were also discussing surfacing the results to devs in PRs. |
The following accounts have interacted with this PR and/or linked issues. I will continue to update these lists as activity occurs. You can also manually ask me to refresh this list by adding the If you're merging code through a pull request on GitHub, copy and paste the following into the bottom of the merge commit message.
To understand the WordPress project's expectations around crediting contributors, please review the Contributor Attribution page in the Core Handbook. |
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 great improvement. Thanks
Can you share where the core setup handles this? |
In test-performance.yml |
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.
Thanks for this, @swissspidy!
For anyone with more ideas about how to use job summaries, Trac-56150 is an overarching ticket for proposing new ways to utilize this feature in our workflows managed in WordPress/wordpress-develop.
What?
Server-Timing
information in performance testsSee #33645
Fixes #61411
To-do:
Why?
How?
Testing Instructions
Testing Instructions for Keyboard
Screenshots or screencast