Add slicing benchmarks for vortex-buffer #8323
Merged
CodSpeed HQ / CodSpeed Performance Analysis
succeeded
Jun 9, 2026 in 0s
Performance Gate Passed
⚠️ Unknown Walltime execution environment detected
Using the Walltime instrument on standard Hosted Runners will lead to inconsistent data.
For the most accurate results, we recommend using CodSpeed Macro Runners: bare-metal machines fine-tuned for performance measurement consistency.
⚡ 6 improved benchmarks
✅ 1517 untouched benchmarks
🆕 3 new benchmarks
Performance Changes
| Mode | Benchmark | BASE |
HEAD |
Efficiency | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ⚡ | Simulation | chunked_bool_canonical_into[(1000, 10)] |
46.7 µs | 31.8 µs | +46.95% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | bitwise_not_vortex_buffer_mut[128] |
275.3 ns | 216.9 ns | +26.89% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | chunked_varbinview_canonical_into[(1000, 10)] |
197.9 µs | 161.8 µs | +22.34% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | bitwise_not_vortex_buffer_mut[1024] |
336.9 ns | 278.6 ns | +20.94% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | chunked_varbinview_into_canonical[(1000, 10)] |
213.6 µs | 177.3 µs | +20.42% |
| ⚡ | Simulation | bitwise_not_vortex_buffer_mut[2048] |
400.6 ns | 342.2 ns | +17.05% |
| 🆕 | Simulation | slice_empty_vortex |
N/A | 2.7 µs | N/A |
| 🆕 | Simulation | slice_tight_loop_arrow[65536] |
N/A | 34.2 µs | N/A |
| 🆕 | Simulation | slice_tight_loop_vortex[65536] |
N/A | 58.9 µs | N/A |
Tip
Curious why this is faster? Comment @codspeedbot explain why this is faster on this PR, or directly use the CodSpeed MCP with your agent.
Comparing adamg/buffer-slicing-bench (6a4e697) with develop (a038963)
Loading