Tweak the size of caches for parallel consensus calling down to reduc… #881
Conversation
This file contains 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
|
FYI: #867 |
Codecov ReportBase: 95.66% // Head: 95.66% // No change to project coverage 👍
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #881 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 95.66% 95.66%
=======================================
Files 125 125
Lines 7239 7239
Branches 507 507
=======================================
Hits 6925 6925
Misses 314 314
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here. ☔ View full report at Codecov. |
|
nh13
approved these changes
Oct 20, 2022
|
I like #867 and we'd be happy for it to remain open, but this seems like a good quick win. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
…e memory usage.
@nh13 In my hands this is no slower on "normal" looking data (i.e. 1-10s of reads per tag family), but significantly reduces memory usage when pathological data is present (e.g. tag families with 10,000s of reads). Do you think it's ok to just tweak these down, or do you think we should add command line parameters to control cache sizing?