Closed ChumpChief closed 1 month ago
Metric Name | Baseline Size | Compare Size | Size Diff |
---|---|---|---|
aqueduct.js | 457.99 KB | 458.02 KB | ⯅ +35 Bytes |
azureClient.js | 555.23 KB | 555.28 KB | ⯅ +49 Bytes |
connectionState.js | 680 Bytes | 680 Bytes | ■ No change |
containerRuntime.js | 258.67 KB | 258.68 KB | ⯅ +14 Bytes |
fluidFramework.js | 406.94 KB | 406.95 KB | ⯅ +14 Bytes |
loader.js | 134.04 KB | 134.05 KB | ⯅ +14 Bytes |
map.js | 42.13 KB | 42.14 KB | ⯅ +7 Bytes |
matrix.js | 146.41 KB | 146.42 KB | ⯅ +7 Bytes |
odspClient.js | 523.37 KB | 523.42 KB | ⯅ +49 Bytes |
odspDriver.js | 97.55 KB | 97.57 KB | ⯅ +21 Bytes |
odspPrefetchSnapshot.js | 42.61 KB | 42.62 KB | ⯅ +14 Bytes |
sharedString.js | 163.13 KB | 163.14 KB | ⯅ +7 Bytes |
sharedTree.js | 397.45 KB | 397.46 KB | ⯅ +7 Bytes |
Total Size | 3.3 MB | 3.3 MB | ⯅ +245 Bytes |
Baseline commit: ac3948a7e18981f3fe8496c296d20443f9ce3d62
Generated by :no_entry_sign: dangerJS against 13fe6516f49e8e4ddd853bf4a1d2eb5bd6fd11f8
can this PR be split apart, such that refactoring and new functionality are in different PRs to make review easier. I also think the refactoring in fine, but the new functionality will need further discussion.
✅ Successfully linked to Azure Boards work item(s):
can this PR be split apart, such that refactoring and new functionality are in different PRs to make review easier. I also think the refactoring in fine, but the new functionality will need further discussion.
I can probably do that - if you have feedback on the new functionality please go ahead though, happy to start considering in parallel.
can this PR be split apart, such that refactoring and new functionality are in different PRs to make review easier. I also think the refactoring in fine, but the new functionality will need further discussion.
I can probably do that - if you have feedback on the new functionality please go ahead though, happy to start considering in parallel.
First split piece: #21997
can this PR be split apart, such that refactoring and new functionality are in different PRs to make review easier. I also think the refactoring in fine, but the new functionality will need further discussion.
I can probably do that - if you have feedback on the new functionality please go ahead though, happy to start considering in parallel.
First split piece: #21997
Second split piece: #22002
This PR does 3 things:
The motivation for the smoke test is that the FRS Canary stress tests have been failing for a while (and yes, need investigation still), but additionally each failure is taking the full 2 hours to time out. This smoke test aims to help them fail faster, since it's immediately apparent we aren't able to create and/or load a container (getting 504 errors currently). With this change, I'd expect the FRS Canary run to fail in ~2 minutes instead.
AB#9092