That is correct - I asked for purely organizational purposes. Please keep
in mind that there is still some work to do in terms of getting rid of some
test flakiness, properly building the test code before running the tests
and detecting the anomalies/regressions that happen in IOs. We're working
on it and will inform the community when it's done.

Thank you for all the comments so far!

2018-05-16 23:11 GMT+02:00 Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com>:

> Commented on the JIRA. I think this topic isn't so much about
> runner-to-runner comparison but just getting organized. For me working on a
> particular runner or IO or DSL the results are very helpful for seeing
> trends over time.
>
> On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 7:05 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Lukasz,
>>
>> Thanks, gonna comment in the Jira.
>>
>> Generally speaking, I'm not a big fan to compare a runner versus
>> another, because there are bunch of parameters that can influence the
>> results.
>>
>> Regards
>> JB
>>
>> On 16/05/2018 15:54, Łukasz Gajowy wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >
>> > I created an issue which I believe is interesting in terms of what
>> > should be included in the Performance Testing dashboard and what
>> > shouldn't. Speaking more generally, we have to settle which
>> > results should be treated as official ones. The issue description
>> > contains my idea of solving it, but I might miss something there. If
>> > you're interested in this topic and willing to contribute you're
>> welcome
>> > to!
>> >
>> > Issue link: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-4298
>> >
>> > (please note that there's a related issue linked)
>> >
>> >
>> > Best regards,
>> > Łukasz Gajowy
>>
>

Reply via email to