pydantic-core
pydantic-core copied to clipboard
pydantic
experiment: build release with `panic=abort`
Change Summary
Just to see what the estimated performance speedup of panic=abort is. It would have significantly worse UX on any panics though.
Related issue number
N/A
Checklist
- [ ] Unit tests for the changes exist
- [ ] Documentation reflects the changes where applicable
- [ ] Pydantic tests pass with this
pydantic-core(except for expected changes) - [ ] My PR is ready to review, please add a comment including the phrase "please review" to assign reviewers
CodSpeed Performance Report
Merging #1159 will not alter performance
Comparing dh/panic-abort (8ece60b) with main (031fc93)
Summary
✅ 155 untouched benchmarks
![codspeed-hq[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/257293?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
:loudspeaker: Thoughts on this report? Let us know!
![codecov[bot] avatar](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/254?v=4 "Published by a pub.dev verified publisher"){kind=small}
Let's consider rebasing this once the PyO3 changes for the "bound" API are done. There's no clear win here.
I think the main win here is from better inlining of some of PyO3's internals, so maybe there's a future win to be had inside PyO3 before we try this change.
I've updated the pr, but I think we shouldn't merge this before 2.7, given the number of changes involved, we should wait for 2.8 for this.
I would suggest we think carefully before merging this, in particular how the changes to aborting instead of unwinding will affect users and whether that's something we actually want.
@davidhewitt, is this something that we're still considering, or can we close as not planned?
