travis: Don't set RUST_LOG globally
#40686
Merged
+12
−14
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
|
r? @brson (rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override) |
alexcrichton
force-pushed
the
less-logging
branch
from
fb2aa01 to
2514c84
Compare
I have a suspicion that this caused a large regression in cycle times by forcing the compiler to perform more checks on every `debug!` statement, so let's test this out by removing the `RUST_LOG` env var globally. This regression in cycle time was witnessed between [two] [builds] where the [PR] in question didn't do much suspicious. Judging by how the stage0 times *also* regressed though then this is my best guess. [two]: https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/builds/210149932 [builds]: https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/builds/210179995 [PR]: rust-lang#40446
alexcrichton
force-pushed
the
less-logging
branch
from
2514c84 to
7305ca3
Compare
|
@bors r+ p=1 |
|
📌 Commit 7305ca3 has been approved by |
|
⌛ Testing commit 7305ca3 with merge 3d94584... |
|
💔 Test failed - status-travis |
|
@bors: retry
That took... 6 hours...
…On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 4:41 AM, bors ***@***.***> wrote:
💔 Test failed - status-travis
<https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/builds/213257177>
—
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#40686 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD95M1D0xB2IAAgHDRIXWm7MssDNxqZks5rn5tNgaJpZM4MjCp7>
.
|
bors
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 21, 2017
travis: Don't set `RUST_LOG` globally I have a suspicion that this caused a large regression in cycle times by forcing the compiler to perform more checks on every `debug!` statement, so let's test this out by removing the `RUST_LOG` env var globally. This regression in cycle time was witnessed between [two] [builds] where the [PR] in question didn't do much suspicious. Judging by how the stage0 times *also* regressed though then this is my best guess. [two]: https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/builds/210149932 [builds]: https://travis-ci.org/rust-lang/rust/builds/210179995 [PR]: #40446
|
☀️ Test successful - status-appveyor, status-travis |
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.
I have a suspicion that this caused a large regression in cycle times by forcing
the compiler to perform more checks on every
debug!statement, so let's testthis out by removing the
RUST_LOGenv var globally.This regression in cycle time was witnessed between two builds where the
PR in question didn't do much suspicious. Judging by how the stage0 times
also regressed though then this is my best guess.