ArthurTaylor added a comment.

  I've done some more investigation here over in T356896 
<https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T356896> - I'm pretty certain that this is 
nothing to do with an external cache or about localisation. It seems just to be 
that we have big test suites and a greedy internal cache of objects in the 
`ResourceLoader` - multiple copies of 30MBs of strings are created during the 
module building and Javascript minification process.
  
  I added a patch there and it moved the dial a little bit. I can keep digging 
and trying to optimise things, but my question would be how much effort it 
makes sense to spend here to optimise a case that we don't have in production 
(where we're not trying to serve 30MB of QUnit tests), vs. simply upping the 
memory limit for the CI containers for QUnit runners.
  
  @hashar, @Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE  - what do you think? On the one hand, I can 
see that it's good to run the tests in the same constrained environment that we 
run production in - not doing that will cause some issues to slip through the 
testing net. On the other hand, QUnit and our current ResourceLoader 
implementation is a pretty memory-hungry combination and we seem (according to 
my research at least) just to be pushing up against the limits of that with a 
128MB memory constraint.

TASK DETAIL
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T356402

EMAIL PREFERENCES
  https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/

To: ArthurTaylor
Cc: Lucas_Werkmeister_WMDE, Krinkle, hashar, Michael, Aklapper, ArthurTaylor, 
Danny_Benjafield_WMDE, Astuthiodit_1, karapayneWMDE, Invadibot, maantietaja, 
ItamarWMDE, Akuckartz, pdehaye, Nandana, Lahi, Gq86, Andrawaag, 
GoranSMilovanovic, QZanden, YULdigitalpreservation, KimKelting, LawExplorer, 
Salgo60, _jensen, rosalieper, Scott_WUaS, MisterSynergy, thcipriani, abian, 
Wikidata-bugs, aude, Lydia_Pintscher, Mbch331, Jay8g
_______________________________________________
Wikidata-bugs mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to