Repository navigation
improve source browser performance with big source archives - #3658
Merged
Merged
Conversation
syphar
force-pushed
the
faster-content
branch
from
October 31, 2026 01:03
d1ca7d9 to
f6738a6
Compare
Member
Author
GuillaumeGomez
approved these changes
Nov 2, 2026
Member
|
Nice, thanks! |
GuillaumeGomez
temporarily deployed
to
github-pages
November 2, 2026 10:26 — with
GitHub Actions
Inactive
This branch was previously deployed
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 super high server load today got me to look into where certain endpoints spend time again.
And one thing was odd:

This is happening when our source-browser inspects the list of files in the source archive to generate the directory listing.
There seem to be crates where the source archive has >10k files:
Using these I wrote a benchmark, and could reproduce the issue when I had parallel clients on the same sqlite db.
So I changed the logic so we're using sqlite functions to do the work:
or even faster.