bench(bitpacking): more representative unpack_indices benchmarks - #194
Conversation
Merging this PR will degrade performance by 35.71%
Warning Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed. Performance Changes
Tip Investigate this regression by commenting Comparing Footnotes
|
Codex Review SummaryThis comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings. |
## 🤖 New release * `fastlanes`: 0.7.0 -> 0.7.1 (✓ API compatible changes) <details><summary><i><b>Changelog</b></i></summary><p> <blockquote> ## [0.7.1](v0.7.0...v0.7.1) - 2026-09-01 ### Added - *(bitpacking)* Add batched index unpacking ([#190](#190)) ### Other - *(bitpacking)* more representative unpack_indices benchmarks ([#194](#194)) </blockquote> </p></details> --- This PR was generated with [release-plz](https://github.com/release-plz/release-plz/). Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <41898282+github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
The benchmarks from #190 did not compare the three paths fairly. The compiler treated the bit width as a constant for some paths and removed work that real callers still do. This PR gives every path the same runtime bit width and covers all four integer types near the candidate cutoffs.
It also restores extraneous code comment removals in #190 and makes the new tests fail safely if an unpack method skips an output.