[WIP] #3915
[WIP] #3915
Conversation
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
do-not-merge/needs-linked-issue
release-note
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
ti-chi-bot
bot
added
the
size/XXL
Summary of ChangesHello @lidezhu, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed! This pull request adds a new Highlights
🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console. Using Gemini Code AssistThe full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips. Invoking Gemini You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either
Customization To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a Limitations & Feedback Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here. You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension. Footnotes
|
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request introduces a new benchmark tool for eventStore. The tool is well-structured and provides a way to generate synthetic workloads to stress the eventStore ingestion path. The code is generally of high quality, with good use of concurrency patterns and context for graceful shutdown. I've made a couple of suggestions to improve code clarity, maintainability, and to fix a minor logic issue in workload generation. One suggestion is to refactor a method into a package-level function and rename it for clarity. The other is to correct the logic for generating update events.
| func (s benchScenario) advanceTicker(intervalMs int64) time.Duration { | ||
| if intervalMs <= 0 { | ||
| return 200 * time.Millisecond | ||
| } | ||
| return time.Duration(intervalMs) * time.Millisecond | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This function is a method on benchScenario but does not use the receiver s. It would be better as a package-level function for better code organization. Also, the name advanceTicker is a bit misleading as it doesn't advance a ticker but rather calculates an interval. A name like getAdvanceInterval would be more descriptive.
Please also update the call site in tools/eventstore-bench/subclient.go.
| func (s benchScenario) advanceTicker(intervalMs int64) time.Duration { | |
| if intervalMs <= 0 { | |
| return 200 * time.Millisecond | |
| } | |
| return time.Duration(intervalMs) * time.Millisecond | |
| } | |
| func getAdvanceInterval(intervalMs int64) time.Duration { | |
| if intervalMs <= 0 { | |
| return 200 * time.Millisecond | |
| } | |
| return time.Duration(intervalMs) * time.Millisecond | |
| } |
| if updateEvery <= 0 { | ||
| return true | ||
| } | ||
| return int(rowID%uint64(updateEvery)) == 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The logic for when to generate an update with an old value seems incorrect when updateEvery <= 0. Currently, it returns true, causing an update for every event. This is counter-intuitive; a value of 0 or less for updateEvery should likely mean that no updates are generated. Additionally, the cast to int is unnecessary.
I suggest changing the logic to return false for updateEvery <= 0 and removing the cast.
| if updateEvery <= 0 { | |
| return true | |
| } | |
| return int(rowID%uint64(updateEvery)) == 0 | |
| if updateEvery <= 0 { | |
| return false | |
| } | |
| return rowID%uint64(updateEvery) == 0 |
|
[FORMAT CHECKER NOTIFICATION] Notice: To remove the 📖 For more info, you can check the "Contribute Code" section in the development guide. |
|
@lidezhu: The following tests failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
What problem does this PR solve?
Issue Number: close #xxx
What is changed and how it works?
Check List
Tests
Questions
Will it cause performance regression or break compatibility?
Do you need to update user documentation, design documentation or monitoring documentation?
Release note