Comparing
fix/forum-topic-reply-routing
(a009f19
) withmain
(277e7db
)-30%
- Regression
- 1
- Untouched
- 38
- Skipped
- 5
No successful run was found on main ( 35ae27f) during the generation of this report, so 277e7db was used instead as the comparison base. There might be some changes unrelated to this pull request in this report.
Benchmarks
5 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
session_store_list[1]
crates/benchmarks/benches/boot.rsSkipped
16.6 µs*
session_store_list[1000]
crates/benchmarks/benches/boot.rsSkipped
512.1 µs*
session_store_list[100]
crates/benchmarks/benches/boot.rsSkipped
63.8 µs*
session_store_list_empty
crates/benchmarks/benches/boot.rsSkipped
5.3 µs*
session_store_list[10]
crates/benchmarks/benches/boot.rsSkipped
39.9 µs*
Commits
Click on a commit to change the comparison rangeBase
main
277e7db
-0.03%
fix(telegram): route forum-topic replies to correct thread
49a593c
2 days ago
by penso-30.18%
fix(telegram): restore raw chat_id in logs, add thread_id to tracing
a009f19
2 days ago
by penso