Skip to content
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

perf(s3stream): use for loop rather than stream in critical paths #894

Merged

Conversation

Chillax-0v0
Copy link
Contributor

@Chillax-0v0 Chillax-0v0 requested a review from superhx January 12, 2024 11:27
@Chillax-0v0 Chillax-0v0 self-assigned this Jan 12, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 12, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (87098f5) 54.98% compared to head (a058058) 54.99%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main     #894      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     54.98%   54.99%   +0.01%     
- Complexity     1243     1244       +1     
============================================
  Files           133      133              
  Lines          8534     8534              
  Branches        789      789              
============================================
+ Hits           4692     4693       +1     
  Misses         3425     3425              
+ Partials        417      416       -1     
Components Coverage Δ
RocketMQ Broker ∅ <ø> (∅)
RocketMQ Common 5.80% <ø> (ø)
RocketMQ Controller 54.58% <ø> (ø)
RocketMQ Proxy 37.18% <ø> (ø)
RocketMQ Store 73.65% <ø> (+0.04%) ⬆️
RocketMQ Stream ∅ <ø> (∅)
RocketMQ Metadata 35.44% <ø> (ø)

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes

@superhx superhx merged commit 3d31f48 into main Jan 15, 2024
7 checks passed
@superhx superhx deleted the perf-s3stream-use-for-loop-rather-than-stream-in-critical-path branch January 15, 2024 02:46
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants