Skip to content

Skip op critical path benchmark test on FRS (all R11s actually) #25570

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
markfields merged 4 commits into from
Jan 26, 2026
Merged

Skip op critical path benchmark test on FRS (all R11s actually) #25570

Changes from 2 commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
be218bd
Skip op critical path benchmark test on FRS (all R11s actually)
markfields Sep 26, 2025
bb4fa80
Make sure provider is defined
markfields Dec 10, 2025
5f9a19a
Merge branch 'main' into op-bench-skip
markfields Jan 12, 2026
c689c69
Merge branch 'main' into op-bench-skip
markfields Jan 26, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
10 changes: 9 additions & 1 deletion packages/test/test-end-to-end-tests/src/test/benchmark/opCriticalPath.time.spec.ts
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -59,6 +59,13 @@ describeCompat(

let testId = 0;

beforeEach("check driver compatibility", function () {
provider = getTestObjectProvider();
if (provider.driver.type === "r11s" || provider.driver.type === "routerlicious") {
this.skip(); // This test is not reliable with FRS for some reason
}
});

const setup = async () => {
testId++;
provider = getTestObjectProvider();
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -93,7 +100,8 @@ describeCompat(
before: async () => {
await setup();
},
benchmarkFnAsync: async () => {
// eslint-disable-next-line object-shorthand
Copy link
Contributor

@steffenloesch steffenloesch Dec 10, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any particular reason for this change? Seems unnecessary.

Copy link
Member Author

@markfields markfields Jan 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You might be right... but not going to revisit this, I've spent enough time on this change (and a related infra improvement)

benchmarkFnAsync: async function () {
sendOps("A");
// There's no event fired for "flush" so the simplest thing is to wait for the outbound queue to be idle.
// This should not add much time, and is part of the real flow so it's ok to include it in the benchmark.
Expand Down
Loading