Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

api/benchmark-results: additional filters? #1508

Open
austin3dickey opened this issue Oct 19, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

api/benchmark-results: additional filters? #1508

austin3dickey opened this issue Oct 19, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@austin3dickey
Copy link
Member

Today the GET /api/benchmark-results/ endpoint has the following filters:

  • run_id
  • earliest_timestamp
  • latest_timestamp
  • run_reason

Others have been requested in the past:

#786 (comment)

tags["name"], case (the rest of tags), hardware, context

#786 (comment)

ability to filter by commit

#746 (comment)

filter(hardware.name == "ursa-i9-9960x")

#746 (comment)

context["benchmark_language"]

Probably, repository is also important, for instances tracking multiple repos.

And I can't find the link, but I remember talking about how a history_fingerprint filter would be similar to the GET /api/history endpoint. (Maybe that's worth a separate ticket?)

Something to keep in mind as we consider new filters: we have to maintain a DB index for each combination of filters that we let users request, or else the request will return a 500 on Arrow-size data. This will add some disk space to our DB, a bit of extra write time, and more code to maintain. Maybe this is okay. But we should do some due diligence to figure out if it's worth it, versus requiring client-side filtering.

(IMO that index caveat would not apply to a commit_hash filter, since like run_id, the number of results associated with one commit should not grow unbounded over months and months.)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant