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

perf_hooks: implementation of Performance Timing API #14680

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jasnell
Copy link
Member

@jasnell jasnell commented Aug 7, 2017

An initial implementation of the Performance Timing API for Node.js. This is the same Performance Timing API implemented by modern browsers with a number of Node.js specific properties. The User Timing mark() and measure() APIs are implemented, as is a Node.js specific flavor of the Frame Timing for measuring event loop duration.

const { performance } = require('perf_hooks');
performance.mark('A');
setTimeout(() => {
  performance.mark('B');
  performance.measure('A to B', 'A', 'B');
  const entry = performance.getEntriesByName('A to B', 'measure');
  console.log(entry.duration);
}, 10000);

The implementation is at the native layer and makes use of uv_hrtime().
This should enable eventual integeration with the Inspector protocol
so that the performance timeline can be viewed in debugging tools.

The implementation is extensible and should allow us to add new
performance entry types as we go (e.g. for measuring i/o perf,
etc).

Documentation and a test are provided.

/cc @mcollina

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • tests and/or benchmarks are included
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

perf_hooks

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added the lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. label Aug 7, 2017
@jasnell jasnell added the semver-minor PRs that contain new features and should be released in the next minor version. label Aug 7, 2017
@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Aug 7, 2017

Suggestion: Run make coverage and be sure that all the new code paths are covered by tests.

@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

mscdex commented Aug 7, 2017

Why deviate from browsers by putting this on process instead of making it "global" like we do with setTimeout, setInterval, etc.?

@vsemozhetbyt vsemozhetbyt added the performance Issues and PRs related to the performance of Node.js. label Aug 7, 2017
Copy link
Member

@addaleax addaleax left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I’ll try to give this a full review later :)

or `'measure'`.

### Class: PerformanceFrame
<!~- YAML
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Starting here, these comments have a broken start token

}

class Performance {
constructor() {}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should this throw?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, it shouldn't. The constructor is not exposed to end users and those tho get there via process.performance.constructor won't hurt anything if they happen to create a new instance.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Aug 7, 2017

@mscdex ... every time I suggest adding a global, people say no.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Aug 7, 2017

@Trott ... I will be :-)

@mscdex
Copy link
Contributor

mscdex commented Aug 8, 2017

@jasnell That might be the case in general, but for APIs shared with browsers it makes more sense to me IMHO. I can't imagine there would be that many people negatively affected by adding it as a "global" (real or otherwise).

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Aug 8, 2017

@mscdex ... I don't disagree, but I've run into opposition for URL, TextEncoder and TextDecoder, all of which are globals in the browser.

assert(process.performance);
assert(process.performance.nodeTiming);
assert(process.performance.nodeFrame);
assert(process.performance.timeOrigin);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The next line makes this assertion unnecessary.

}

{
let n;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You don't need to hoist n.

src/node.cc Outdated
@@ -4633,6 +4639,7 @@ inline int Start(uv_loop_t* event_loop,

int Start(int argc, char** argv) {
atexit([] () { uv_tty_reset_mode(); });

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unrelated change.

src/node.cc Outdated
}

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unrelated change.

src/node.cc Outdated
@@ -4525,10 +4527,12 @@ inline int Start(Isolate* isolate, IsolateData* isolate_data,
Environment env(isolate_data, context);
CHECK_EQ(0, uv_key_create(&thread_local_env));
uv_key_set(&thread_local_env, &env);

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unrelated change.

Returns a list of all `PerformanceEntry` objects in chronological order
with respect to `startTime` whose `performanceEntry.type` is equal to `type`.

#### performance.getEntriesByName(name[, type])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It seems this should go before performance.getEntriesByType(type) alphabetically.

@@ -1858,3 +2178,6 @@ cases:
[note on process I/O]: process.html#process_a_note_on_process_i_o
[process_emit_warning]: #process_process_emitwarning_warning_type_code_ctor
[process_warning]: #process_event_warning
[W3C Performance Timeline]: https://www.w3.org/TR/performance-timeline
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These three references are out of the sorting order.

* `endMark` {string}

Creates a new `PerformanceMeasure` entry in the Performance Timeline. A
`PerformanceMeasure` is a subclass of `PerformanceMeasure` whose
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is a subclass of PerformanceEntry?


The `endMark` argument must identify any *existing* `PerformanceMark` in the
the Performance Timeline or any of the timestamp properties provided by the
`PerformanceNodeTiming` class. The the named `endMark` does not exist, an
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The the -> If the?

@refack
Copy link
Contributor

refack commented Aug 8, 2017

Hooking it on process seems strange... IMHO either set it as global or make it a module.

Copy link
Member

@TimothyGu TimothyGu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Code review will come later...

The high resolution millisecond timestamp marking the starting time of the
Performance Entry.

#### performanceEntry.type
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's entryType in the spec...

-->

The Performance Timing API provides an implementation of the
[W3C Performance Timeline][] specification. The purpose of the API
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@domenic Should we link to the published version of the spec or the latest editor's draft?

Also this should reference User Timing and High Resolution Time specs since we also implement those.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Always the latest ED

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Intentionally started with the first version, will be updating to the latest. The plan is to update incrementally.

The [`timeOrigin`][] specifies the high-resolution millisecond timestamp from
which all performance metric durations are measured.

### Class: PerformanceEntry
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In Level 2 there's also a toJSON() method in PerformanceEntry that just serializes the four properties.

});
```

### Class: Performance
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

High Resolution Time also defines a toJSON() method.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Aug 8, 2017

A couple of things that still need to be done (in case anyone wants to help ;-) ...)

  1. Implement PerformanceObserver .. I've got a couple of ideas on this already so may get to it as early as tomorrow.

  2. Ensure that the list of PerformanceEntry instances are in proper chronological order. PerformanceMeasure instances in particular.

  3. Implement toJSON() on PerformanceEntry

@hiroppy hiroppy added the process Issues and PRs related to the process subsystem. label Aug 8, 2017

### Class: process.PerformanceObserver(callback)

* `callback` {Function}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not sure, but maybe it is worth documenting the callback's arguments? Is observer the same as the new process.PerformanceObserver() here? And maybe PerformanceObserverEntryList API is also worth documenting?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yeah, i'm going to be updating to include those details :-)

```

Because `PerformanceObserver` instances introduce their own additional
performance overhead, instances should be left subscribed to notifications
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It may be my mediocre English, but "instances should be left subscribed to notifications indefinitely" and "Users should disconnect observers as soon as they are no longer needed" seem contradictory. Should it be "should not be left"?

Copy link
Member Author

@jasnell jasnell Aug 8, 2017

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just forgot the not in should not

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Aug 8, 2017

Putting this in a new core module makes sense. Currently, the perf_hooks module name is not taken on npm and has good alignment with async_hooks. More obvious other options like performance and perf are already taken.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member Author

jasnell commented Aug 9, 2017

Ok, I've refactored this to use a new perf_hooks module...

e.g.

const {
  performance,
  PerformanceObserver
} = require('perf_hooks');

performance.mark('test');

The `startMark` argument may identify any *existing* `PerformanceMark` in the
the Performance Timeline, or *may* identify any of the timestamp properties
provided by the `PerformanceNodeTiming` class. If the named `startMark` does
not exist, then `startMark` is set to `timeOrigin` by default.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is the first occurrence of timeOrigin in this file. I think it is better to provide link here.


The `endMark` argument must identify any *existing* `PerformanceMark` in the
the Performance Timeline or any of the timestamp properties provided by the
`PerformanceNodeTiming` class. If the named `endMark` does not exist, an
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If the endMark is not passed, shouldn't we throw an error instead of stringifying an undefined and using it?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We do throw.


* {number}

The total number of milliseconds ellapsed for this entry. This value will not
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

elapsed


* {number}

The high resolution millisecond timestamp marking the starting time of the
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

In few other places in the documentation, high resolution is hyphenated. Perhaps we should unhyphenate them?


* {string}

The type of the performance entry. Current may be one of: `'node'`, `'mark'`,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Did you mean Currently it may be?

* `options` {Object}
* `entryTypes` {Array} An array of strings identifying the types of
`PerformanceEntry` instances the observer is interested in. If not
provided an error will be throw.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thrown

`PerformanceEntry` instances the observer is interested in. If not
provided an error will be throw.
* `buffered` {boolean} If true, the notification callback will be
called using `SetImmediate()` and multiple `PerformanceEntry` instance
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

setImmediate

@@ -1852,11 +1852,11 @@ cases:
[Cluster]: cluster.html
[Duplex]: stream.html#stream_duplex_and_transform_streams
[LTS]: https://github.com/nodejs/LTS/
[note on process I/O]: process.html#process_a_note_on_process_i_o
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Unrelated change?

with respect to `startTime` whose `performanceEntry.entryType` is equal to
`type`.

### performance.mark([name])
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If the same name is used, it resets, right? That has to be captured here.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@domenic ... one point of clarification on this. If I call performance.mark('A') twice, should there be two mark entries in the timeline returned by GetEntries() or only one?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As far as I can tell from skimming https://w3c.github.io/user-timing/#dom-performance-mark it creates two entries. Maybe @igrigorik can confirm.

src/node_perf.h Outdated
// * PerformanceFrame
//
// PerformanceNodeTiming provides information about Node.js specific
// Node.js startup milestones.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nit: This Node.js feels redundant

Copy link
Member

@mcollina mcollina left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM with some nits.

}

getEntries() {
return Array.from(this[kEntries]);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Last time I checked, Array.from was extremely slow. Can we do without?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

the response has to be an array. I'll be looking at this more tho

// Set up the callback used to receive PerformanceObserver notifications
function observersCallback(entry) {
const type = mapTypes(entry.entryType);
const set = getObserversSet(type);
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why are we using a Set? Typically iterating over an array is way faster, and overhead matters here.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The set is to ensure that items are only added once. I'm looking in to see if we need to keep that requirement.

// If we are, schedule a setImmediate call if one hasn't already
if (!observer[kQueued]) {
observer[kQueued] = true;
setImmediate(doNotify.bind(observer));
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

why setImmediate and not nextTick? Can you add a comment?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The purpose is to allow multiple items to collect. nextTick fires too quickly for that purpose

});

module.exports = {
performance: new Performance(),
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I usually prefer to have top-level functions for singletons, as the module is already a singleton, but feel free to ignore.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

do you mean having module.exports = new Performance() instead? The challenge with that is the PerformanceObserver class, which also hangs off module.exports here.

MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 10, 2017
An initial implementation of the Performance Timing API for Node.js.
This is the same Performance Timing API implemented by modern browsers
with a number of Node.js specific properties. The User Timing mark()
and measure() APIs are implemented, garbage collection timing, and
node startup milestone timing.

```js
const { performance } = require('perf_hooks');

performance.mark('A');
setTimeout(() => {
  performance.mark('B');
  performance.measure('A to B', 'A', 'B');
  const entry = performance.getEntriesByName('A to B', 'measure')[0];
  console.log(entry.duration);
}, 10000);
```

The implementation is at the native layer and makes use of uv_hrtime().
This should enable *eventual* integration with things like Tracing
and Inspection.

The implementation is extensible and should allow us to add new
performance entry types as we go (e.g. for measuring i/o perf,
etc).

Documentation and a test are provided.

PR-URL: #14680
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Sep 10, 2017
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 11, 2017
An initial implementation of the Performance Timing API for Node.js.
This is the same Performance Timing API implemented by modern browsers
with a number of Node.js specific properties. The User Timing mark()
and measure() APIs are implemented, garbage collection timing, and
node startup milestone timing.

```js
const { performance } = require('perf_hooks');

performance.mark('A');
setTimeout(() => {
  performance.mark('B');
  performance.measure('A to B', 'A', 'B');
  const entry = performance.getEntriesByName('A to B', 'measure')[0];
  console.log(entry.duration);
}, 10000);
```

The implementation is at the native layer and makes use of uv_hrtime().
This should enable *eventual* integration with things like Tracing
and Inspection.

The implementation is extensible and should allow us to add new
performance entry types as we go (e.g. for measuring i/o perf,
etc).

Documentation and a test are provided.

PR-URL: #14680
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 12, 2017
An initial implementation of the Performance Timing API for Node.js.
This is the same Performance Timing API implemented by modern browsers
with a number of Node.js specific properties. The User Timing mark()
and measure() APIs are implemented, garbage collection timing, and
node startup milestone timing.

```js
const { performance } = require('perf_hooks');

performance.mark('A');
setTimeout(() => {
  performance.mark('B');
  performance.measure('A to B', 'A', 'B');
  const entry = performance.getEntriesByName('A to B', 'measure')[0];
  console.log(entry.duration);
}, 10000);
```

The implementation is at the native layer and makes use of uv_hrtime().
This should enable *eventual* integration with things like Tracing
and Inspection.

The implementation is extensible and should allow us to add new
performance entry types as we go (e.g. for measuring i/o perf,
etc).

Documentation and a test are provided.

PR-URL: #14680
Reviewed-By: Matteo Collina <[email protected]>
MylesBorins added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 12, 2017
Notable Changes

* build:
  * Snapshots are now re-enabled in V8
  #14875

* console:
  * Implement minimal `console.group()`.
  #14910

* deps:
  * upgrade libuv to 1.14.1
    #14866
  * update nghttp2 to v1.25.0
    #14955

* dns:
  * Add `verbatim` option to dns.lookup(). When true, results from the
    DNS resolver are passed on as-is, without the reshuffling that
    Node.js otherwise does that puts IPv4 addresses before IPv6
    addresses.
    #14731

* fs:
  * add fs.copyFile and fs.copyFileSync which allows for more efficient
    copying of files.
    #15034

* inspector:
  * Enable async stack traces
    #13870

* module:
  * Add support for ESM. This is currently behind the
    `--experimental-modules` flag and requires the .mjs extension.
    `node --experimental-modules index.mjs`
    #14369

* napi:
  * implement promise
    #14365

* os:
  * Add support for CIDR notation to the output of the
    networkInterfaces() method.
    #14307

* perf_hooks:
  * An initial implementation of the Performance Timing API for
    Node.js. This is the same Performance Timing API implemented by
    modern browsers with a number of Node.js specific properties. The
    User Timing mark() and measure() APIs are implemented, as is a
    Node.js specific flavor of the Frame Timing for measuring event
    loop duration.
    #14680

* tls:
  * multiple PFX in createSecureContext
    [#14793](#14793)

* Added new collaborators:
  * BridgeAR – Ruben Bridgewater

PR-URL: #15308
MylesBorins added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 12, 2017
Notable Changes

* build:
  * Snapshots are now re-enabled in V8
  #14875

* console:
  * Implement minimal `console.group()`.
  #14910

* deps:
  * upgrade libuv to 1.14.1
    #14866
  * update nghttp2 to v1.25.0
    #14955

* dns:
  * Add `verbatim` option to dns.lookup(). When true, results from the
    DNS resolver are passed on as-is, without the reshuffling that
    Node.js otherwise does that puts IPv4 addresses before IPv6
    addresses.
    #14731

* fs:
  * add fs.copyFile and fs.copyFileSync which allows for more efficient
    copying of files.
    #15034

* inspector:
  * Enable async stack traces
    #13870

* module:
  * Add support for ESM. This is currently behind the
    `--experimental-modules` flag and requires the .mjs extension.
    `node --experimental-modules index.mjs`
    #14369

* napi:
  * implement promise
    #14365

* os:
  * Add support for CIDR notation to the output of the
    networkInterfaces() method.
    #14307

* perf_hooks:
  * An initial implementation of the Performance Timing API for
    Node.js. This is the same Performance Timing API implemented by
    modern browsers with a number of Node.js specific properties. The
    User Timing mark() and measure() APIs are implemented, as is a
    Node.js specific flavor of the Frame Timing for measuring event
    loop duration.
    #14680

* tls:
  * multiple PFX in createSecureContext
    [#14793](#14793)

* Added new collaborators:
  * BridgeAR – Ruben Bridgewater

PR-URL: #15308
addaleax pushed a commit to addaleax/node that referenced this pull request Sep 13, 2017
Notable Changes

* build:
  * Snapshots are now re-enabled in V8
  nodejs#14875

* console:
  * Implement minimal `console.group()`.
  nodejs#14910

* deps:
  * upgrade libuv to 1.14.1
    nodejs#14866
  * update nghttp2 to v1.25.0
    nodejs#14955

* dns:
  * Add `verbatim` option to dns.lookup(). When true, results from the
    DNS resolver are passed on as-is, without the reshuffling that
    Node.js otherwise does that puts IPv4 addresses before IPv6
    addresses.
    nodejs#14731

* fs:
  * add fs.copyFile and fs.copyFileSync which allows for more efficient
    copying of files.
    nodejs#15034

* inspector:
  * Enable async stack traces
    nodejs#13870

* module:
  * Add support for ESM. This is currently behind the
    `--experimental-modules` flag and requires the .mjs extension.
    `node --experimental-modules index.mjs`
    nodejs#14369

* napi:
  * implement promise
    nodejs#14365

* os:
  * Add support for CIDR notation to the output of the
    networkInterfaces() method.
    nodejs#14307

* perf_hooks:
  * An initial implementation of the Performance Timing API for
    Node.js. This is the same Performance Timing API implemented by
    modern browsers with a number of Node.js specific properties. The
    User Timing mark() and measure() APIs are implemented, as is a
    Node.js specific flavor of the Frame Timing for measuring event
    loop duration.
    nodejs#14680

* tls:
  * multiple PFX in createSecureContext
    [nodejs#14793](nodejs#14793)

* Added new collaborators:
  * BridgeAR – Ruben Bridgewater

PR-URL: nodejs#15308
`PerformanceNodeTiming` class. If the named `endMark` does not exist, an
error will be thrown.

### performance.nodeFrame
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jasnell I'm not finding this property on the performance object, and I can't find any sign of a PerformanceFrame or a PerformanceNodeFrame classes anywhere other than the docs. Did this not get implemented because it depends on libuv/libuv#1489, or is there something else I am missing?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That should have been removed. I may have forgotten to do so. Yes, the libuv pr needs to land before that can return

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That should have been removed. I may have forgotten to do so. Yes, the libuv pr needs to land before that can return

sam-github added a commit to sam-github/node that referenced this pull request Sep 27, 2017
The node frame (aka loop) timing API did not land, it depends on
libuv/libuv#1489 which is still a WIP.

See: nodejs#14680 (comment)
jasnell pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 29, 2017
The node frame (aka loop) timing API did not land, it depends on
libuv/libuv#1489 which is still a WIP.

See: #14680 (comment)

PR-URL: #15641
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 29, 2017
The node frame (aka loop) timing API did not land, it depends on
libuv/libuv#1489 which is still a WIP.

See: #14680 (comment)

PR-URL: #15641
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
addaleax pushed a commit to addaleax/ayo that referenced this pull request Sep 30, 2017
The node frame (aka loop) timing API did not land, it depends on
libuv/libuv#1489 which is still a WIP.

See: nodejs/node#14680 (comment)

PR-URL: nodejs/node#15641
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2017
The node frame (aka loop) timing API did not land, it depends on
libuv/libuv#1489 which is still a WIP.

See: #14680 (comment)

PR-URL: #15641
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 3, 2017
The node frame (aka loop) timing API did not land, it depends on
libuv/libuv#1489 which is still a WIP.

See: #14680 (comment)

PR-URL: #15641
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2017
The node frame (aka loop) timing API did not land, it depends on
libuv/libuv#1489 which is still a WIP.

See: #14680 (comment)

PR-URL: #15641
Reviewed-By: Colin Ihrig <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Timothy Gu <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Luigi Pinca <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Jeremiah Senkpiel <[email protected]>
Reviewed-By: Ruben Bridgewater <[email protected]>
@gibfahn
Copy link
Member

gibfahn commented Jan 15, 2018

Release team were -1 on landing on v6.x, if you disagree let us know.

@fanatid
Copy link
Contributor

fanatid commented Sep 3, 2019

Sorry if this wrong place for ask, but I'm not sure where will be better.
I'm going through perf_hooks and can not find where entryType equal to node used. Is it used at all? If not, why this was added?

https://github.com/fanatid/notes/tree/master/2019-09-12-node-perf-hooks

nodejs-github-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 10, 2024
aduh95 added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 11, 2024
louwers pushed a commit to louwers/node that referenced this pull request Nov 2, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lib / src Issues and PRs related to general changes in the lib or src directory. notable-change PRs with changes that should be highlighted in changelogs. performance Issues and PRs related to the performance of Node.js. process Issues and PRs related to the process subsystem. semver-minor PRs that contain new features and should be released in the next minor version.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.