Skip to content

disable unions, since they're still experimental #96

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 17, 2019

Conversation

lavalamp
Copy link
Contributor

benchmark                       old ns/op     new ns/op     delta
BenchmarkApplyNewObject-12      1355981       1363050       +0.52%
BenchmarkUpdateNewObject-12     1565341       1228947       -21.49%
BenchmarkRepeatedUpdate-12      443528        396604        -10.58%
BenchmarkSetToFields-12         5154          5107          -0.91%
BenchmarkFieldsToSet-12         10050         10170         +1.19%
BenchmarkYAMLToTyped-12         56860         54439         -4.26%

benchmark                       old allocs     new allocs     delta
BenchmarkApplyNewObject-12      4264           4214           -1.17%
BenchmarkUpdateNewObject-12     4850           3661           -24.52%
BenchmarkRepeatedUpdate-12      1255           1179           -6.06%
BenchmarkSetToFields-12         14             14             +0.00%
BenchmarkFieldsToSet-12         82             82             +0.00%
BenchmarkYAMLToTyped-12         90             90             +0.00%

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Aug 16, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 16, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@apelisse apelisse left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hmm, not sure why you did it this way, I don't really want to have this for a long time, wouldn't it have been easier to jusk skip the tests?

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 17, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: apelisse, lavalamp

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

configObject, err = configObject.NormalizeUnionsApply(configObject)
if err != nil {
return nil, fieldpath.ManagedFields{}, err
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Actually, you forgot one just below (yes, we call it before AND after merging)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

#98

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 348b25d into kubernetes-sigs:master Aug 17, 2019
@lavalamp
Copy link
Contributor Author

Didn't just skip the tests because if the code is checked in, it needs to not bitrot. Otherwise I need to delete it.

@apelisse
Copy link
Contributor

apelisse commented Aug 17, 2019

That's fair

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants