Skip to content

refactor(tests): Enhance benchmarks by separating allocation checks from main loops and adding input size reporting for throughput metrics#123

Merged
ReneWerner87 merged 4 commits intomasterfrom
test-strings-itter
Jul 7, 2025
Merged

refactor(tests): Enhance benchmarks by separating allocation checks from main loops and adding input size reporting for throughput metrics#123
ReneWerner87 merged 4 commits intomasterfrom
test-strings-itter

Conversation

@sixcolors
Copy link
Member

@sixcolors sixcolors commented Jul 5, 2025

Enhance benchmarks by separating allocation checks from main loops and adding input size reporting for throughput metrics.

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • Tests
    • Improved benchmark tests for string case conversion by refining performance measurement and throughput reporting.

@sixcolors sixcolors requested a review from a team as a code owner July 5, 2025 17:50
@sixcolors sixcolors requested review from ReneWerner87, efectn and gaby and removed request for a team July 5, 2025 17:50
@coderabbitai
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Jul 5, 2025

Walkthrough

The benchmark functions for ToUpper and ToLower in the test suite were refactored to remove allocation measurements from inside the benchmark loops. b.SetBytes and b.ResetTimer were added before the loops for throughput reporting and accurate timing. Allocation assertions and correctness checks remain after the loops. No exported entities were changed.

Changes

File(s) Change Summary
strings_test.go Updated benchmark functions for ToUpper and ToLower: removed AllocsPerRun calls inside loops, added b.SetBytes and b.ResetTimer, moved allocation assertions outside loops, maintained correctness checks.

Sequence Diagram(s)

sequenceDiagram
    participant Benchmark as BenchmarkRunner
    participant Function as ToUpper/ToLower

    Benchmark->>Benchmark: SetBytes(input size)
    Benchmark->>Benchmark: ResetTimer()
    loop b.N times
        Benchmark->>Function: Call with input string
    end
    Benchmark->>Benchmark: Check correctness with require.Equal
Loading

Possibly related PRs

Suggested reviewers

  • ReneWerner87
  • efectn

Poem

In the land of tests where benchmarks run,
Rabbits hop and code is spun.
Loops are neat, allocations clear,
Byte counts now for all to hear.
With every hop, performance grows,
As clarity in the garden flows.
🐇✨


📜 Recent review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 1767320 and 2287074.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • strings_test.go (3 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
  • strings_test.go
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms (8)
  • GitHub Check: Build (1.24.x, macos-13)
  • GitHub Check: Build (1.24.x, windows-latest)
  • GitHub Check: Build (1.23.x, macos-13)
  • GitHub Check: Build (1.23.x, macos-latest)
  • GitHub Check: Build (1.23.x, windows-latest)
  • GitHub Check: Build (1.23.x, ubuntu-latest)
  • GitHub Check: Compare
  • GitHub Check: Analyse
✨ Finishing Touches
  • 📝 Generate Docstrings
🧪 Generate Unit Tests
  • Create PR with Unit Tests
  • Post Copyable Unit Tests in a Comment
  • Commit Unit Tests in branch test-strings-itter

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share
🪧 Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>, please review it.
    • Explain this complex logic.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai explain this code block.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai gather interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table. Additionally, render a pie chart showing the language distribution in the codebase.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and explain its main purpose.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Support

Need help? Create a ticket on our support page for assistance with any issues or questions.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate docstrings to generate docstrings for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai generate sequence diagram to generate a sequence diagram of the changes in this PR.
  • @coderabbitai auto-generate unit tests to generate unit tests for this PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai or @coderabbitai title anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

CodeRabbit Configuration File (.coderabbit.yaml)

  • You can programmatically configure CodeRabbit by adding a .coderabbit.yaml file to the root of your repository.
  • Please see the configuration documentation for more information.
  • If your editor has YAML language server enabled, you can add the path at the top of this file to enable auto-completion and validation: # yaml-language-server: $schema=https://coderabbit.ai/integrations/schema.v2.json

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Summary of Changes

Hello @sixcolors, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request refactors the existing Go benchmarks for string case conversion functions (ToUpper and ToLower) to provide more accurate and detailed performance metrics. The changes focus on aligning the benchmark execution with standard Go practices for measuring performance over iterations and improving the precision of memory allocation checks.

Highlights

  • Benchmark Iteration Logic: Modified Benchmark_ToUpper and Benchmark_ToLower to execute the core string conversion operation for b.N iterations within the main benchmark loop. This change ensures that the primary benchmark run accurately measures the function's execution time over many iterations, aligning with standard Go benchmarking practices.
  • Improved Allocation Testing: Refactored the allocation checks in Benchmark_ToUpper and Benchmark_ToLower. Instead of measuring allocations within the main performance loop, a separate testing.AllocsPerRun(100, func() { ... }) call is now used specifically for verifying zero allocations when upperNoConv or lowerNoConv is true. This isolates allocation measurement from performance measurement, providing clearer and more reliable results.
  • Enhanced Benchmark Reporting: Added b.SetBytes(int64(len(tc.input))) to all ToUpper and ToLower benchmarks, including Benchmark_StdToUpper and Benchmark_StdToLower. This addition enables the Go benchmark tool to report the throughput in bytes per second, offering a more comprehensive view of the functions' performance characteristics.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist is currently in preview and may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments to provide feedback.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 5, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 96.36%. Comparing base (dad0ed9) to head (2287074).
Report is 5 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master     #123   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   96.36%   96.36%           
=======================================
  Files           9        9           
  Lines         495      495           
=======================================
  Hits          477      477           
  Misses         12       12           
  Partials        6        6           
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 96.36% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Copy link
Contributor

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request refactors the benchmarks for ToUpper and ToLower to use the standard b.N loop and b.SetBytes, which provides more accurate and informative performance metrics. The changes are a definite improvement over the previous implementation.

My main feedback is to remove the redundant allocation checks from the benchmark functions. These checks are already present in the corresponding Test functions, which is the more appropriate place for correctness guarantees. This will improve the separation of concerns between tests and benchmarks.

Otherwise, the changes look good.

@sixcolors sixcolors marked this pull request as draft July 5, 2025 17:59
@sixcolors sixcolors changed the title refactor(tests): benchmarks for ToUpper and ToLower functions to add itterations and improve allocation checks refactor(tests): Enhance benchmarks by separating allocation checks from main loops and adding input size reporting for throughput metrics Jul 5, 2025
@sixcolors sixcolors marked this pull request as ready for review July 5, 2025 20:01
Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actionable comments posted: 1

📜 Review details

Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Plan: Pro

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 9f4194e and 1767320.

📒 Files selected for processing (1)
  • strings_test.go (3 hunks)
🧰 Additional context used
🧠 Learnings (2)
📓 Common learnings
Learnt from: efectn
PR: gofiber/fiber#3162
File: hooks_test.go:228-228
Timestamp: 2024-12-13T08:14:22.851Z
Learning: In Go test files, prefer using the `require` methods from the `testify` package for assertions instead of manual comparisons and calls to `t.Fatal` or `t.Fatalf`.
Learnt from: sixcolors
PR: gofiber/fiber#2922
File: middleware/cors/utils.go:63-71
Timestamp: 2024-07-26T21:00:12.902Z
Learning: The project uses the testify/assert package for assertions in unit tests.
Learnt from: sixcolors
PR: gofiber/fiber#2922
File: middleware/cors/utils.go:63-71
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T19:06:06.583Z
Learning: The project uses the testify/assert package for assertions in unit tests.
Learnt from: sixcolors
PR: gofiber/fiber#3016
File: middleware/session/store.go:164-167
Timestamp: 2024-10-02T23:03:31.727Z
Learning: Unit tests in this project use testify require.
Learnt from: sixcolors
PR: gofiber/fiber#3016
File: middleware/session/store.go:164-167
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T19:06:06.583Z
Learning: Unit tests in this project use testify require.
Learnt from: luk3skyw4lker
PR: gofiber/storage#1342
File: clickhouse/clickhouse_test.go:138-160
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T19:06:06.583Z
Learning: The `Test_Reset` function in `clickhouse/clickhouse_test.go` already includes a verification step to ensure the storage is empty after a reset operation by checking that a previously set key returns an empty byte slice.
Learnt from: luk3skyw4lker
PR: gofiber/storage#1342
File: clickhouse/clickhouse_test.go:138-160
Timestamp: 2024-07-01T15:48:53.094Z
Learning: The `Test_Reset` function in `clickhouse/clickhouse_test.go` already includes a verification step to ensure the storage is empty after a reset operation by checking that a previously set key returns an empty byte slice.
Learnt from: ReneWerner87
PR: gofiber/fiber#3161
File: app.go:923-932
Timestamp: 2024-11-15T07:56:21.623Z
Learning: In the Fiber framework, breaking changes are acceptable when moving from version 2 to version 3, including modifications to method signatures such as in the `Test` method in `app.go`.
strings_test.go (9)
Learnt from: ReneWerner87
PR: gofiber/fiber#3161
File: app.go:923-932
Timestamp: 2024-11-15T07:56:21.623Z
Learning: In the Fiber framework, breaking changes are acceptable when moving from version 2 to version 3, including modifications to method signatures such as in the `Test` method in `app.go`.
Learnt from: efectn
PR: gofiber/fiber#3162
File: hooks_test.go:228-228
Timestamp: 2024-12-13T08:14:22.851Z
Learning: In Go test files, prefer using the `require` methods from the `testify` package for assertions instead of manual comparisons and calls to `t.Fatal` or `t.Fatalf`.
Learnt from: norri
PR: gofiber/recipes#2701
File: clean-code/app/datasources/database/db_mock.go:13-19
Timestamp: 2024-11-23T19:50:06.387Z
Learning: In test code within `clean-code/app/datasources/database/db_mock.go`, adding safety checks like context validation, safe type assertions, and extra documentation is not necessary.
Learnt from: luk3skyw4lker
PR: gofiber/storage#1342
File: clickhouse/clickhouse_test.go:138-160
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T19:06:06.583Z
Learning: The `Test_Reset` function in `clickhouse/clickhouse_test.go` already includes a verification step to ensure the storage is empty after a reset operation by checking that a previously set key returns an empty byte slice.
Learnt from: luk3skyw4lker
PR: gofiber/storage#1342
File: clickhouse/clickhouse_test.go:138-160
Timestamp: 2024-07-01T15:48:53.094Z
Learning: The `Test_Reset` function in `clickhouse/clickhouse_test.go` already includes a verification step to ensure the storage is empty after a reset operation by checking that a previously set key returns an empty byte slice.
Learnt from: sixcolors
PR: gofiber/fiber#3016
File: middleware/session/store.go:164-167
Timestamp: 2024-10-02T23:03:31.727Z
Learning: Unit tests in this project use testify require.
Learnt from: sixcolors
PR: gofiber/fiber#3016
File: middleware/session/store.go:164-167
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T19:06:06.583Z
Learning: Unit tests in this project use testify require.
Learnt from: sixcolors
PR: gofiber/fiber#2922
File: middleware/cors/utils.go:63-71
Timestamp: 2024-07-26T21:00:12.902Z
Learning: The project uses the testify/assert package for assertions in unit tests.
Learnt from: sixcolors
PR: gofiber/fiber#2922
File: middleware/cors/utils.go:63-71
Timestamp: 2024-10-08T19:06:06.583Z
Learning: The project uses the testify/assert package for assertions in unit tests.
🧬 Code Graph Analysis (1)
strings_test.go (1)
strings.go (2)
  • ToUpper (30-50)
  • ToLower (8-27)
🪛 GitHub Check: lint
strings_test.go

[failure] 230-230:
unnecessary trailing newline (whitespace)

🪛 GitHub Actions: golangci-lint
strings_test.go

[error] 220-220: golangci-lint (revive): extra empty line at the end of a block (empty-lines)

🪛 GitHub Actions: Test
strings_test.go

[error] 169-169: Test failure in Test_ToUpper/numbers: Expected zero allocations but got 87. ToUpper should not allocate for numbers.

🔇 Additional comments (5)
strings_test.go (5)

222-223: Excellent benchmark improvements!

Adding b.SetBytes() and b.ResetTimer() follows Go benchmarking best practices by enabling throughput metrics and excluding setup time from measurements.


225-228: Great refactoring to separate allocation measurement from performance measurement.

The change from testing.AllocsPerRun to a direct loop over b.N aligns perfectly with the PR objectives. Moving the correctness check outside the loop ensures it doesn't interfere with performance measurements while still validating the benchmark results.


238-244: Consistent improvements across all benchmark functions.

The same beneficial changes are applied to Benchmark_ToLower - adding byte count reporting, timer reset, and moving correctness validation outside the performance loop.


253-254: Standard library benchmarks properly aligned.

Good to see the standard library benchmarks (Benchmark_StdToUpper and Benchmark_StdToLower) also receiving the same b.SetBytes() and b.ResetTimer() improvements for consistent benchmark methodology.


268-269: Complete benchmark suite consistency.

All benchmark functions now follow the same improved pattern for accurate performance measurement and throughput reporting.

@sixcolors
Copy link
Member Author

Update is to benchmarks, failing benchmarks expected, ready to merge unless there are requested changes.

@ReneWerner87 ReneWerner87 merged commit af68b46 into master Jul 7, 2025
17 of 18 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants