-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18
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
jest runtime slower then non-bazel #50
Comments
Measure 3 things:
|
also measure: Is the patches overhead a one-time start-up cost or does is scale with number of test cases/specs |
Overall the times with vs without the patches scale along with the number of tests, which I assume means number of files loaded. With a single test it seems about 8% slower, with 2k tests it was about 5% slower (using the best times with ~5 tries, very inaccurate but consistent enough I'll trust them). |
Curious whether aspect's "mac as local dev" customers|partners|users prefer to disable sandboxing on mac per bazelbuild/bazel#8230 (comment). Confirming that we also tried Some anecdata: one of our jest test suites (Glean closed source) running under aspect takes ~6x longer to execute with the sandbox enabled vs not. 1 minute vs 6 minutes. |
Hello, I wanted to provide something to help repro two sources of slowness: https://github.com/tbarrella/jest-large Setup slownessI'm concerned about Jest setup time, which includes crawling that seems unoptimized for Bazel: bazel-contrib/rules_nodejs#2817 (comment) In a large codebase, I've observed up to ~15s setup time within Bazel, compared to a ~1s setup time without Bazel (with the Jest cache). By "setup" I mean time between Jest startup and running the first test, inferred from the total time minus the "Test: _s" output With this smaller repro, I found (on a mac)
I think in a TypeScript codebase, with JavaScript transpiled by
|
Mostly due to fs sandboxing. The
readlinkSync
call innextHopSync
fails and throws on most invocations causing substantial cpu usage calculating stack traces.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: