fix: Forward missing CLI flags to spawned server in async runner#141
Open
mcurrier2 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
fix: Forward missing CLI flags to spawned server in async runner#141mcurrier2 wants to merge 1 commit into
mcurrier2 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
The async benchmark runner's spawn_server_process did not forward several CLI flags that affect server behavior: - --buffer-size: Server would use default buffer size instead of the user-specified or auto-computed size, causing client/server mismatch - --shm-direct: Server wouldn't know to use direct memory mode - --pmq-priority: PMQ priority mismatch between client and server - --send-delay: Server couldn't enable precise timestamps for latency-focused SHM-direct benchmarks - -v (verbose): Server logging was always at default level regardless of user's verbosity request These flags were already correctly forwarded by the blocking runner's spawn_server_process_with_latency_file. This commit brings the async runner to parity. Fixes #124 AI-assisted-by: Claude Opus 4.6 Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
|
Warning Review limit reached
Next review available in: 26 minutes Enable usage-based reviews in Billing to review now. Otherwise, wait until the next included review is available. How can I continue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the To avoid repeated limits, reduce automatic review volume by pausing incremental auto-reviews earlier, using label-based review opt-in, excluding WIP or generated PR titles, or requesting reviews manually when the PR is ready. If your team needs uninterrupted high-volume reviews, an organization admin can enable usage-based reviews. How do review limits work?CodeRabbit enforces per-developer PR review limits for each organization. Most developers receive the normal plan review availability. For paid Pro and Pro+ PR reviews, CodeRabbit uses adaptive limits for sustained high-volume activity. When a developer's recent PR review activity reaches the 95th percentile or higher among CodeRabbit users, additional reviews become available more gradually as earlier reviews age out of the rolling window. Please refer docs for additional details. Review details⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Organization UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Enterprise Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
📈 Changed lines coverage: 69.23% (9/13)🚨 Uncovered lines in this PR
📊 Code Coverage Summary
|
4 tasks
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
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.
Summary
--buffer-sizeso server uses matching transport config--shm-directflag when direct memory mode is enabled--pmq-priorityfor POSIX message queue benchmarks--send-delayso server can enable precise timestamps-vverbose flags for server-side debuggingContext
The async runner's
spawn_server_processwas missing several CLI flags that the blocking runner already forwarded correctly. This caused the server to use default values while the client used user-specified or auto-computed values, leading to potential mismatches in buffer sizes, transport modes, and logging levels.Fixes #124
Test plan
Made with Cursor