Skip to content
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

feat: add an optional process-wide limit for IOPS #2928

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 24, 2024

Conversation

westonpace
Copy link
Contributor

This also fixes a bug where we were not shutting down the I/O loop which would eventually lead to a small memory leak.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the enhancement New feature or request label Sep 24, 2024
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Sep 24, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 57.77778% with 19 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 77.77%. Comparing base (f48e970) to head (645bc68).
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
rust/lance-io/src/scheduler.rs 57.77% 11 Missing and 8 partials ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #2928      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   77.81%   77.77%   -0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         231      231              
  Lines       70259    70485     +226     
  Branches    70259    70485     +226     
==========================================
+ Hits        54672    54819     +147     
- Misses      12693    12771      +78     
- Partials     2894     2895       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 77.77% <57.77%> (-0.05%) ⬇️

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.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why not a semaphore?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Good idea. Switched to a sempahore which simplified things a bit.

@westonpace westonpace merged commit 47eb00e into lancedb:main Sep 24, 2024
22 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants