Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Revert "Implementation of random interleaving. (#1105)" #1161

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 1, 2021

Conversation

dmah42
Copy link
Member

@dmah42 dmah42 commented Jun 1, 2021

This reverts commit a6a738c.

@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes label Jun 1, 2021
@dmah42 dmah42 added next-release PRs or Issues that should be included in the next release and removed cla: yes labels Jun 1, 2021
@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes label Jun 1, 2021
Copy link
Collaborator

@LebedevRI LebedevRI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

:(

@dmah42 dmah42 merged commit e025dd5 into main Jun 1, 2021
@chfast
Copy link
Contributor

chfast commented Jun 1, 2021

Why?

@LebedevRI
Copy link
Collaborator

Why?

I guess, the description should have at least linked to the disscussion in #1105 (comment)

I'll try to take a look, i think at least the pure interleaving part should be easy..

@dmah42
Copy link
Member Author

dmah42 commented Jun 1, 2021

Why?

Please see the comments left on #1105. Essentially, it broke some expectations around how mintime and repetition flags work causing some existing runs to take 10x longer than expected. It's fixable, but I'd rather get the broken experience out of HEAD first.

@dmah42 dmah42 deleted the revert_random_interleaving branch June 14, 2021 12:54
vincenzopalazzo pushed a commit to vincenzopalazzo/benchmark that referenced this pull request Feb 8, 2022
# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
cla: yes next-release PRs or Issues that should be included in the next release
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants