fix: omit baseline-only formats from the file-size report - #9589
1 benchmark regressed
⚠️ 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.
⚡ 4 improved benchmarks
❌ 1 regressed benchmark
✅ 2092 untouched benchmarks
⏩ 106 skipped benchmarks1
Warning
Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.
Performance Changes
| Mode | Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ❌ | WallTime | mul_u32_nonnull_avx512 |
5.6 µs | 6.3 µs | -10.86% |
| ⚡ | WallTime | arrow_checked_add_u32_neon[16384] |
20.4 µs | 12.5 µs | +62.86% |
| ⚡ | WallTime | arrow_checked_add_u32_avx512[16384] |
21.3 µs | 17.6 µs | +20.66% |
| ⚡ | WallTime | arrow_checked_add_u32_avx2[16384] |
21.3 µs | 17.7 µs | +20.52% |
| ⚡ | WallTime | words_gather_scalar_avx2[65536] |
9.4 µs | 8.3 µs | +13.82% |
Tip
Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.
Comparing ji/eager-knuth-yrk9n9 (1397b0e) with develop (4f45f72)
Footnotes
-
106 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. ↩