-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 379
Add overhead benchmark to parachain-template #2858
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Add overhead benchmark to parachain-template #2858
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a test to check that the new command works?
Fot the storage
benchmark there seems to be one for the asset hubs:
.args(["benchmark", "storage", "--chain", runtime]) |
This test is from
I tested this one manually with |
@kalaninja could we run benchbot here to see that it works? maybe for parachain-template it is not configured |
We can run it for the asset hubs over here once its merged and the bench bot is updated: #2900. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM (tested it locally).
We could still add an integration test as good measure to ensure that we dont break it in the future, but its also fine like this 😄
You can enable it with `--features runtime-benchmarks`." | ||
.into()) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Also here the Question; why not use the cfg!
to make it look more compact instead of the cfg(not
...?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
the only reason is that it is done with attributes in all other places. So, just didn't want to mix multiple approaches.
Adds
benchmark overhead
that was missing in the previous PR #1156