fs: improve performance for fs.globSync() - #59188
Closed
Trott wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Sorry, something went wrong.
Trott
marked this pull request as ready for review
July 23, 2025 22:53
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Author
|
Letting GitHub Actions tests run before I set it back to draft mode and then run a benchmark job. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅ Additional details and impacted files @@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #59188 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 90.05% 90.06%
=======================================
Files 648 648
Lines 191025 191025
Branches 37451 37450 -1
=======================================
+ Hits 172032 172044 +12
- Misses 11605 11613 +8
+ Partials 7388 7368 -20
... and 21 files with indirect coverage changes 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Author
|
Oh no, looks like the benchmark compare job on CI no longer works? |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Author
|
I ran it locally and the numbers are not large or high-confidence. I'll run it a couple more times in different ways to see if it changes anything. confidence improvement accuracy (*) (**) (***) fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='callback' pattern='*.js' dir='lib' n=1000 -0.15 % ±0.59% ±0.78% ±1.02% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='callback' pattern='**/*' dir='lib' n=1000 -0.12 % ±0.46% ±0.61% ±0.80% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='callback' pattern='**/**.js' dir='lib' n=1000 0.02 % ±0.44% ±0.58% ±0.76% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='promise' pattern='*.js' dir='lib' n=1000 -0.98 % ±2.98% ±3.97% ±5.18% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='promise' pattern='**/*' dir='lib' n=1000 0.83 % ±1.98% ±2.64% ±3.44% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='promise' pattern='**/**.js' dir='lib' n=1000 * 1.89 % ±1.74% ±2.32% ±3.04% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='sync' pattern='*.js' dir='lib' n=1000 -0.13 % ±0.80% ±1.06% ±1.38% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='sync' pattern='**/*' dir='lib' n=1000 0.15 % ±0.43% ±0.57% ±0.74% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='false' mode='sync' pattern='**/**.js' dir='lib' n=1000 -0.02 % ±0.56% ±0.74% ±0.97% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='callback' pattern='*.js' dir='lib' n=1000 0.18 % ±0.49% ±0.65% ±0.85% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='callback' pattern='**/*' dir='lib' n=1000 0.21 % ±0.35% ±0.46% ±0.60% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='callback' pattern='**/**.js' dir='lib' n=1000 0.35 % ±0.42% ±0.56% ±0.73% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='promise' pattern='*.js' dir='lib' n=1000 -1.59 % ±2.20% ±2.93% ±3.82% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='promise' pattern='**/*' dir='lib' n=1000 -0.32 % ±2.04% ±2.72% ±3.55% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='promise' pattern='**/**.js' dir='lib' n=1000 3.61 % ±6.32% ±8.50% ±11.23% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='sync' pattern='*.js' dir='lib' n=1000 -0.04 % ±0.61% ±0.82% ±1.06% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='sync' pattern='**/*' dir='lib' n=1000 * 0.67 % ±0.56% ±0.75% ±0.98% fs/bench-glob.js recursive='true' mode='sync' pattern='**/**.js' dir='lib' n=1000 0.12 % ±0.35% ±0.46% ±0.60% Be aware that when doing many comparisons the risk of a false-positive result increases. In this case, there are 18 comparisons, you can thus expect the following amount of false-positive results: 0.90 false positives, when considering a 5% risk acceptance (*, **, ***), 0.18 false positives, when considering a 1% risk acceptance (**, ***), 0.02 false positives, when considering a 0.1% risk acceptance (***) |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Author
|
Subsequent benchmark run was not much different. @anonrig If you want to re-open this to check the benchmark code or improve the change here, go for it. But I think this can be closed. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member
Author
|
I guess the way to get this thing's existence to show up in the other PR is to use #57725 (review) rather than the link I used in the PR description. |
Sorry, something went wrong.
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Ref: https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/57725/files#r2024884348