NEW profiler decorator

[viniciusdc]

This should enable us to inspect more functions with more freedom.

[CJ-Wright]

Can you implement this on the current jobs?

[viniciusdc]

Can you implement this on the current jobs?

Yes, it is possible. Give me some minutes and I will create the PR's

[viniciusdc]

I will implement this on the update_prs profiler stuff, this way I can test it in a better way. If goes well we should merge this and use the @profiling() instead

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #1110 into master will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #1110      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   58.72%   58.76%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files          52       57       +5     
  Lines        5018     5194     +176     
==========================================
+ Hits         2947     3052     +105     
- Misses       2071     2142      +71     

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
conda_forge_tick/auto_tick.py	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
conda_forge_tick/make_graph.py	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
conda_forge_tick/profiler.py	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
conda_forge_tick/update_prs.py	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
conda_forge_tick/contexts.py	67.92% <0.00%> (-1.72%)	⬇️
tests/test_mamba_solvable.py	85.71% <0.00%> (-0.50%)	⬇️
conda_forge_tick/migrators/arch.py	26.24% <0.00%> (-0.23%)	⬇️
tests/test_migration_yaml_migration.py	93.33% <0.00%> (-0.15%)	⬇️
tests/test_migrators.py	93.85% <0.00%> (-0.11%)	⬇️
conda_forge_tick/utils.py	58.53% <0.00%> (-0.11%)	⬇️
... and 17 more

---

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 3962f90...e31b4f8. Read the comment docs.

[viniciusdc]

There is a problem with using function_name = f.__name__ to get the process name (for the sub-folders),cause we are actually using it on the main functions so... it is gonna be a mess. I will replace it with

# process name -- aka profiler sub-folder
process_name = os.path.basename(__file__)
# check dir
os.makedirs(f"profiler/{process_name}", exist_ok=True)

Then it should work like this, at update_prs.py for example, the output profiler file should be named asprofiler/update_prs/{current_time}.I will run a local test to check if it works as announced

[viniciusdc]

Local test passed

[viniciusdc]

Also, after #1111 works, we could rethink this #1085, right ?

[CJ-Wright]

yes

[viniciusdc]

As commented by @CJ-Wright there is no need for two PR's with the same goal, then I will be closing #1111 as this PR now comprehends those changes too (in this case as a test for the new @profiling())

[viniciusdc]

Can you implement this on the current jobs?

Once we test it with the update_prs I can insert the on the other process

[viniciusdc]

Once tested and working well, we should go to #1085

[CJ-Wright]

Is this decorator being applied to the auto tick runs as well?

[viniciusdc]

Is this decorator being applied to the auto tick runs as well?

not yet

[viniciusdc]

I want to confirm that it will work as expected, here it goes well but there is always an unexpected thing that can happen

[viniciusdc]

If it works, I will update the autotick with @profiling() and work on the limit stuff (there is so much 'old' information there, only consuming space)

[CJ-Wright]

Do you need this PR merged first?

[viniciusdc]

Do you need this PR merged first?

Yes, if possible. The order should be something like:

1. This PR with the profile.py and the update_prs (as a test);
2. Update auto_tick profiler using the @profiling();
3. Remove old instances of profiled files.

I also can insert the update of auto_tick here instead, this way we don't need to stop it twice, what d you think ?

[CJ-Wright]

It would be good if all the changes related to the profiler decorator could be done in one PR.

[viniciusdc]

It would be good if all the changes related to the profiler decorator could be done in one PR.

For that, I must figure out a way to remove the oldest files from profiler/*, do you have any idea ?

[CJ-Wright]

I would leave that portion out for the moment, since formally it isn't about the decorator, also that requires manual changes to the database.

[viniciusdc]

I would leave that portion out for the moment, since formally it isn't about the decorator, also that requires manual changes to the database.

yup, Y 'r right. So for the profiling that's all here. Unless there is other part of the bot I should add the decorator.

[CJ-Wright]

You could put it on make graph, that might be interesting.