Comparing
bd-7dre-repeated-control-fields
(6f120ea
) withmain
(4de08b6
)-10%
- Regression
- 1
- Untouched
- 59
- Skipped
- 16
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.No successful run was found on main ( 6f120ea) during the generation of this report, so 4de08b6 was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report.
Different runtime environments detected
Some benchmarks with significant performance changes were compared across different runtime environments, which may affect the accuracy of the results. Learn more about regression causes.Benchmarks
16 total
The benchmarks below were skipped, so their baseline results are used instead. If they were deleted in your codebase, archive them to remove them from the performance reports.
Learn more about archiving benchmarks
Learn more about archiving benchmarks
parallel_4x_10k_records
benches/parallel_benchmarks.rs::parallel_benches::benchmark_parallel_4x_10kSkipped
323.2 ms*
read_1k_with_field_access
benches/marc_benchmarks.rs::benches::benchmark_read_with_field_access_1kSkipped
8.2 ms*
parallel_2x_1k_records
benches/parallel_benchmarks.rs::parallel_benches::benchmark_parallel_2x_1kSkipped
16.1 ms*
sequential_2x_10k_records
benches/parallel_benchmarks.rs::parallel_benches::benchmark_sequential_2x_10kSkipped
154.4 ms*
read_10k_records
benches/marc_benchmarks.rs::benches::benchmark_read_10kSkipped
77.4 ms*
parallel_8x_1k_records
benches/parallel_benchmarks.rs::parallel_benches::benchmark_parallel_8x_1kSkipped
63.5 ms*
read_10k_with_field_access
benches/marc_benchmarks.rs::benches::benchmark_read_with_field_access_10kSkipped
79.3 ms*
parallel_4x_1k_records
benches/parallel_benchmarks.rs::parallel_benches::benchmark_parallel_4x_1kSkipped
31.9 ms*
read_1k_records
benches/marc_benchmarks.rs::benches::benchmark_read_1kSkipped
8.6 ms*
serialize_1k_to_xml
benches/marc_benchmarks.rs::benches::benchmark_serialization_to_xml_1kSkipped
34.8 ms*
roundtrip_10k_records
benches/marc_benchmarks.rs::benches::benchmark_roundtrip_10kSkipped
207.5 ms*
parallel_2x_10k_records
benches/parallel_benchmarks.rs::parallel_benches::benchmark_parallel_2x_10kSkipped
164.3 ms*
sequential_2x_1k_records
benches/parallel_benchmarks.rs::parallel_benches::benchmark_sequential_2x_1kSkipped
16.8 ms*
sequential_4x_1k_records
benches/parallel_benchmarks.rs::parallel_benches::benchmark_sequential_4x_1kSkipped
31.6 ms*
serialize_1k_to_json
benches/marc_benchmarks.rs::benches::benchmark_serialization_to_json_1kSkipped
26 ms*
roundtrip_1k_records
benches/marc_benchmarks.rs::benches::benchmark_roundtrip_1kSkipped
19.3 ms*
Commits
Click on a commit to change the comparison rangeBase
main
4de08b6
+10.58%
Fix repeated control fields being dropped (closes #77)
1a88ad0
7 days ago
by dchud-11.24%
Skip pymarc parity tests when pymarc is not installed
1651a41
7 days ago
by dchud+19.85%
Remove unused get_control_field_values() accessor
d6c248b
4 days ago
by dchud-29.65%
Update CHANGELOG for repeated control fields fix (#77, #79)
6f120ea
4 days ago
by dchud