Say which version this is - #82
Merged
Merged
Conversation
The status line still said v0.5.0 three releases after v0.5.0. The download line below it already said v0.8.0, so the README disagreed with itself. While here, the keepalive from v0.8.0 was not mentioned anywhere in the highlights, and it is the part that separates a dead connection from a quiet one. Re-ran the benchmark against the table in this file at both sizes: 0.259 and 0.283 ms against the 0.25 and 0.28 it claims, and the rest within the same margin. Left as it stands.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
The status line said
v0.5.0. The install snippet twelve lines below it saidv0.8.0. Both cannot be right, and the releases page settles it.Also adds the v0.8.0 keepalive to the highlights, which had no line about it: a socket that stops answering is now noticed rather than believed, and that is a property worth stating next to the outbox and the store.
I re-ran the in-repo benchmark against the performance table while I was here, since the store changed in v0.7.0. Measured 0.259 ms and 0.283 ms for the feed query at 20k and 100k events against the 0.25 and 0.28 the table claims, with the rest inside the same margin, so the table stands as written and this PR does not touch it.