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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Parallelize rendering of sibling components to avoid async waterfalls #7071
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
Parallelize rendering of sibling components to avoid async waterfalls #7071
Changes from 4 commits
d65ae9d
c3d9020
e4f3cd1
314f00d
7fff9b6
988f8ea
0c47150
663cdd6
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
All components are kicked off at the same time, so timeTook here will be always be 0 or 1.

I think the test should measure the longest time difference instead.

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.
For my understanding, the fact that all kick off at the same time is the result of this change. Otherwise, they would render in order and the start times would differ by more than 50ms. The big threshold of 50ms is a bit misleading though (I just copied that from the old pr as well)
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.
Yeah I agree that the number is misleading. It's what made me think the intention is to measure the render time. Maybe the duration limit could be shortened and renamed to
kickedOffWithin
?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.
I also liked your idea, so I added the check as well. It's maybe not the cleanest unit test, as it tests more than one thing, but I think it's still OK.
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.
I know this was written this way in the original PR as well, but this message will be shown if the test fails.
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 the heads up, I've seen both interpretations (putting the expected behaviour or the error message in there), but I'm happy to make it more explicit 👍
Some generated files are not rendered by default. Learn more about how customized files appear on GitHub.