ci: reject implicit engine buffer allocation - #9672
Performance Gate Passed
⚠️ Unknown Walltime execution environment detected
Using the Walltime instrument on standard Hosted Runners will lead to inconsistent data.
For the most accurate results, we recommend using CodSpeed Macro Runners: bare-metal machines fine-tuned for performance measurement consistency.
⚠️ Different runtime environments detected
Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments,
which may affect the accuracy of the results.
⚡ 3 improved benchmarks
✅ 2169 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 206 skipped benchmarks1
Performance Changes
| Mode | Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⚡ | Simulation | decompress[u64, (4000, 1024)] |
86.4 µs | 70.6 µs | +22.46% |
| ⚡ | WallTime | words_gather_scalar_avx2[65536] |
9.4 µs | 8.3 µs | +13.63% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | take[duplicates/repeated/primitive/nonnull/chunks=16/indices=1000] |
236.3 µs | 209.3 µs | +12.88% |
Tip
Curious why performance improved? Comment @codspeedbot explain why performance improved on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.
Comparing ngates/buffer-allocator-enforce (b04043d) with ngates/buffer-allocator-execution (e099a82)2
Footnotes
-
206 benchmarks were skipped, so the baseline results were used instead. If they were deleted from the codebase, click here and archive them to remove them from the performance reports. ↩
-
No successful run was found on
ngates/buffer-allocator-execution(c8eae21) during the generation of this report, so 396e05e was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report. ↩