GeezerVisonThe World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory. | ||||||||||||||
| Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites | ||||||||||||||
GeezerVison is showing github.com — fs: remove custom Buffer pool for streams by ronag · Pull Request #33981 · nodejs/node Conversation
|
|
Needs a CI and benchmark CI... However, at the moment I'm unable to start either for some reason. Will try again tomorrow. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you also update the comment on line 134 in test-crypto-authenticated-stream.js?
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
The performance benefit of using a custom pool are negligable. Furthermore, it causes problems with Workers and transferrable. Rather than further adding complexity for compat with Workers, just remove the pooling logic. Refs: nodejs#33880 (comment) Fixes: nodejs#31733
|
Needs a CI and benchmark CI |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/31988/ |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Slower with a low highwatermark < 4k, which is expected and I think that's acceptable as I don't see that being a common case at all. 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=1024 filesize=1024000 encodingType='asc' *** -11.00 % ±3.01% ±4.01% ±5.22% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=1024 filesize=1024000 encodingType='buf' *** -10.15 % ±3.46% ±4.61% ±6.01% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=1024 filesize=1024000 encodingType='utf' *** -6.08 % ±2.53% ±3.37% ±4.40% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=1048576 filesize=1024000 encodingType='asc' 1.28 % ±4.14% ±5.52% ±7.20% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=1048576 filesize=1024000 encodingType='buf' * 14.52 % ±13.09% ±17.42% ±22.67% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=1048576 filesize=1024000 encodingType='utf' 17.52 % ±20.33% ±27.07% ±35.28% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=4096 filesize=1024000 encodingType='asc' -0.39 % ±2.94% ±3.91% ±5.10% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=4096 filesize=1024000 encodingType='buf' * -4.47 % ±3.36% ±4.47% ±5.83% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=4096 filesize=1024000 encodingType='utf' -1.49 % ±2.29% ±3.05% ±3.97% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=65535 filesize=1024000 encodingType='asc' -1.46 % ±8.08% ±10.75% ±13.99% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=65535 filesize=1024000 encodingType='buf' -0.84 % ±7.46% ±9.94% ±12.96% 19:58:22 fs/read-stream-throughput.js n=1024 highWaterMark=65535 filesize=1024000 encodingType='utf' -0.54 % ±6.16% ±8.19% |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
@nodejs/crypto: Got problems with two crypto failures https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-commit-linux-containered/20895/ Any ideas? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
@ronag I've opened nodejs/build#2363 for the setAAD issue. Didn't the crypto check fix the other test failure? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Doesn't seem so. Which confuses me. I'll try another CI. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
@bnoordhuis: Still failing... Do I need to do anything further than ca1d829? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
CI: https://ci.nodejs.org/job/node-test-pull-request/32042/ ✅ |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
|
Landed in db0e991 |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
The performance benefit of using a custom pool are negligable. Furthermore, it causes problems with Workers and transferrable. Rather than further adding complexity for compat with Workers, just remove the pooling logic. Refs: #33880 (comment) Fixes: #31733 PR-URL: #33981 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
|
@ronag could you please backport this to v14.x? It conflicted in a handful of places and I didn't want to try my luck 😅 |
Sorry, something went wrong.
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
The performance benefit of using a custom pool are negligable. Furthermore, it causes problems with Workers and transferrable. Rather than further adding complexity for compat with Workers, just remove the pooling logic. Refs: nodejs#33880 (comment) Fixes: nodejs#31733 PR-URL: nodejs#33981 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
The performance benefit of using a custom pool are negligable. Furthermore, it causes problems with Workers and transferrable. Rather than further adding complexity for compat with Workers, just remove the pooling logic. Refs: #33880 (comment) Fixes: #31733 PR-URL: #33981 Backport-PR-URL: #38397 Reviewed-By: Anna Henningsen <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Ben Noordhuis <[email protected]>
The `test-crypto-authenticated-stream` test was moved out of `test/known_issues` and now lives in `test/parallel` PR-URL: #47454 Refs: #33981 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Moshe Atlow <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
The `test-crypto-authenticated-stream` test was moved out of `test/known_issues` and now lives in `test/parallel` PR-URL: #47454 Refs: #33981 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Moshe Atlow <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
The `test-crypto-authenticated-stream` test was moved out of `test/known_issues` and now lives in `test/parallel` PR-URL: #47454 Refs: #33981 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Moshe Atlow <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
The `test-crypto-authenticated-stream` test was moved out of `test/known_issues` and now lives in `test/parallel` PR-URL: nodejs#47454 Refs: nodejs#33981 Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Moshe Atlow <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]> Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <[email protected]>
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
fs,crypto: AAD decryption of fs stream > 32768 bytes fails
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.