-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38
Allows to trigger on labelling and clean-up the process #400
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
Conversation
Benchmark resultJudge resultBenchmark Report for /home/runner/work/KernelFunctions.jl/KernelFunctions.jlJob Properties
ResultsA ratio greater than
Benchmark Group ListHere's a list of all the benchmark groups executed by this job:
Julia versioninfoTarget
Baseline
Target resultBenchmark Report for /home/runner/work/KernelFunctions.jl/KernelFunctions.jlJob Properties
ResultsBelow is a table of this job's results, obtained by running the benchmarks.
Benchmark Group ListHere's a list of all the benchmark groups executed by this job:
Julia versioninfo
Baseline resultBenchmark Report for /home/runner/work/KernelFunctions.jl/KernelFunctions.jlJob Properties
ResultsBelow is a table of this job's results, obtained by running the benchmarks.
Benchmark Group ListHere's a list of all the benchmark groups executed by this job:
Julia versioninfo
Runtime information
|
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #400 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 92.99% 92.99%
=======================================
Files 52 52
Lines 1214 1214
=======================================
Hits 1129 1129
Misses 85 85 Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
[benchmark] |
[benchmark] |
Benchmark resultJudge resultBenchmark Report for /home/runner/work/KernelFunctions.jl/KernelFunctions.jlJob Properties
ResultsA ratio greater than
Benchmark Group ListHere's a list of all the benchmark groups executed by this job:
Julia versioninfoTarget
Baseline
Target resultBenchmark Report for /home/runner/work/KernelFunctions.jl/KernelFunctions.jlJob Properties
ResultsBelow is a table of this job's results, obtained by running the benchmarks.
Benchmark Group ListHere's a list of all the benchmark groups executed by this job:
Julia versioninfo
Baseline resultBenchmark Report for /home/runner/work/KernelFunctions.jl/KernelFunctions.jlJob Properties
ResultsBelow is a table of this job's results, obtained by running the benchmarks.
Benchmark Group ListHere's a list of all the benchmark groups executed by this job:
Julia versioninfo
Runtime information
|
[benchmark] |
So the main motivation for the PR is to be able to rerun the benchmarks automatically whenever a new commit is pushed? Couldn't this be achieved by checking the labels as well? I also wonder if it's good to rerun benchmarks automatically. I would have thought a natural workflow would be to only trigger it manually, eg before/when a PR is reviewed or merged. Basically similar to Nanosoldier in base. |
This is what this PR is supposed to achieve, both continuous CI via the label, and ponctual trigger via comment. The coma before "once labeled" should be a full stop |
[benchmark] |
[benchmark] |
That's again one of these things that will only work once merged in |
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.
The general setup seems reasonable but of course it's difficult to review properly if we can't run the action. Maybe we just have to iterate and fix issues as they appear.
Co-authored-by: David Widmann <[email protected]>
@devmotion I introduced your changes and I think this is ready to merge |
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.
OK, let's see if it works 🙂
Allows to trigger benchmarking on labelling, will cancel previous running jobs and will always reuse the same comment to upload the benchmarks
The in place workflow is from tkf/BenchmarkCI.jl#91
Note that the proposed method in the posted issue is not relevant anymore and the workflow used corresponds to what is currently in master for JET.jl