search

microsoft / pylance-release

Documentation and issues for Pylance
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
1.71k stars 765 forks source link

Performance issue reported from VSCode/Pylance #6580

Open dax-westerman opened 1 week ago

dax-westerman commented 1 week ago

Environment data

Code Snippet 

XXX

Repro Steps

  1. XXX

Expected behavior

XXX

Actual behavior

XXX

Logs 

XXX
debonte commented 1 week ago

Thanks for the report. Unfortunately, this is not enough information for us to investigate this issue.

If this continues to be a problem, would you please reopen the issue and add the information described in the troubleshooting guide?

dax-westerman commented 1 week ago

No problem, this was a pop-up asking me if I wished to report the performance issue, so I clicked "yes". If there is additional detail I can provide, happy to do so. I am unaware of what caused the issue, however, as it just showed up. That said, I might suggest improving the default issue generation, please. If I am to take the time to help improve the product by sharing details, it will be helpful to know how to do so, other than closing the issue on an item for which I could not have additional context.

debonte commented 1 week ago

Can you share the project you were editing when you encountered this? Also, the "Python Language Service" log (from the time when you saw this) would be helpful.

The agree that using a different issue template for perf issues would make sense.

dax-westerman commented 1 week ago

Sure, be happy to. Attached is log (redacted to obscure compute paths). Sorry, can't post code. In reviewing the places where the long-running operation was occurring, the code's pretty light in those places. That said, I think the issue might be related to Remote-SSH. The remote doesn't have an entry for this time frame, attached is local.

Python Language Server.log

debonte commented 1 week ago

Without being able to repro the issue, we won't be able to fix it. Would you be willing to share the code privately? We would only use it to repro the issue and then delete it. Alternatively, if you can narrow down the repro (ex. by commenting out code until it goes away), perhaps you can generate a separate project that repros the problem without exposing anything proprietary.