Skip to content

Avoid retesting non-viable chunk sizes in tuner#212

Merged
christinaflo merged 1 commit into
aqlaboratory:mainfrom
GMNGeoffrey:chunk-tuner-fix-bin-search
May 28, 2026
Merged

Avoid retesting non-viable chunk sizes in tuner#212
christinaflo merged 1 commit into
aqlaboratory:mainfrom
GMNGeoffrey:chunk-tuner-fix-bin-search

Conversation

@GMNGeoffrey

@GMNGeoffrey GMNGeoffrey commented May 5, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary
The chunk size tuner performs a binary search over chunk sizes, but the existing algorithm only kept track of the lower-bound of the search and so unnecessarily re-tested chunk sizes that had already been proven non-viable.

Changes

  • This commit adds more conventional hi/lo tracking to the chunk size search as well as tests for this failure mode.

Related Issues
Fixes #211

Testing
Added unit tests for this case and confirmed they failed with the old implementation.

@GMNGeoffrey

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@christinaflo PTAL :-)

@christinaflo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Hi @GMNGeoffrey, sorry I was out the last week, I'll take a look at these chunking PRs this week!

The chunk size tuner performs a binary search over chunk sizes, but the
existing algorithm only kept track of the lower-bound of the search and
so unnecessarily re-tested chunk sizes that had already been proven
non-viable. This commit adds more conventional hi/lo tracking to the
chunk size search as well as tests for this failure mode.
@GMNGeoffrey GMNGeoffrey force-pushed the chunk-tuner-fix-bin-search branch from e49f748 to 1be31e0 Compare May 27, 2026 19:45
@christinaflo christinaflo added the safe-to-test Internal only label used to indicate PRs that are ready for automated CI testing. label May 28, 2026

@christinaflo christinaflo left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm!

@christinaflo

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@GMNGeoffrey what's your preferred order for merging in these PRs? I think this is fine to go in but I've been jumping around a bit and want to check I'm not missing anything

@GMNGeoffrey

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

I think probably this order: #212, #224, #227 (#231 should be fine to do separately). And then I can test the perf impact of #213. But I don't think it matters too much. Whatever seems good to go, you can go ahead and merge. I'll need to resolve some merge conflicts regardless (I think I consciously set myself up for some in #227 because I wanted to steal the tests from this PR)

@christinaflo christinaflo merged commit 77d763e into aqlaboratory:main May 28, 2026
11 checks passed
@GMNGeoffrey GMNGeoffrey deleted the chunk-tuner-fix-bin-search branch May 28, 2026 17:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

safe-to-test Internal only label used to indicate PRs that are ready for automated CI testing.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[BUG] Chunk size tuner re-tests non-viable chunk sizes

2 participants