Skip to content

bench(pco): scalar access baseline for CodSpeed - #9896

Merged
joseph-isaacs merged 3 commits into
developfrom
ji/pco-scalar-bench
Sep 15, 2026
Merged

joseph-isaacs merged 3 commits into
developfrom
ji/pco-scalar-bench

bench(pco): rustfmt

7403cf4
Select commit
Loading
Failed to load commit list.
CodSpeed / CodSpeed Performance Analysis failed Sep 15, 2026 in 0s

2 benchmarks 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.

Open the report in CodSpeed to investigate

⚡ 4 improved benchmarks
❌ 2 regressed benchmarks
✅ 2192 untouched benchmarks
🆕 4 new benchmarks
⏩ 218 skipped benchmarks1

Warning

Please fix the performance issues or acknowledge them on CodSpeed.

Performance Changes

Mode Benchmark BASE HEAD Efficiency
Simulation random_i8[0.5] 71.3 µs 94.9 µs -24.81%
Simulation new_raw_prim_test_between[i32, 2048] 64.1 µs 77.9 µs -17.66%
Simulation execute_scalar_struct_wide 503 µs 389.6 µs +29.12%
Simulation random_i16[0.8] 96.4 µs 78.5 µs +22.83%
Simulation execute_scalar_struct_simple 106.5 µs 89.4 µs +19.02%
Simulation allocate_drop_arrow[0] 456.9 ns 402.7 ns +13.45%
🆕 Simulation scalar_access[(1, false, false)] N/A 208.8 µs N/A
🆕 Simulation scalar_access[(1024, false, false)] N/A 132.3 ms N/A
🆕 Simulation scalar_access[(1024, false, true)] N/A 133.3 ms N/A
🆕 Simulation scalar_access[(1024, true, false)] N/A 100.7 ms N/A

Tip

Investigate this regression by commenting @codspeedbot fix this regression on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.


Comparing ji/pco-scalar-bench (7403cf4) with develop (b5f43ba)2

Open in CodSpeed

Footnotes

  1. 218 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.

  2. No successful run was found on develop (d69291f) during the generation of this report, so b5f43ba was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report.