chore(repo): Increase number of parallel running nx tasks#19443
chore(repo): Increase number of parallel running nx tasks#19443
Conversation
size-limit report 📦
|
node-overhead report 🧳Note: This is a synthetic benchmark with a minimal express app and does not necessarily reflect the real-world performance impact in an application.
|
|
hmm somehow this surfaces various test failures. Wondering if this is a problem with some kind of interference when running stuff in parallel. I don't think we can merge this PR in this state but I'd be really curious what's actually causing these fails |
![cursor[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1210556?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Cursor Bugbot has reviewed your changes and found 1 potential issue.
Bugbot Autofix is OFF. To automatically fix reported issues with Cloud Agents, enable Autofix in the Cursor dashboard.
| "autoExit": true | ||
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| "parallel": 5 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Parallel value 5 contradicts PR-described value of 10
Low Severity
The PR description explicitly states "This PR sets the limit to 10" and the benchmarks compare "3 vs 10 tasks in parallel," but the actual committed value is "parallel": 5. The cited speed improvements (e.g., build:tarball 135s → 98s) were measured at parallel: 10, not 5, so the expected performance gains described in the PR won't be realized. Either the value or the description needs updating to avoid confusion during review.
3 participants
After moving from lerna to nx, I noticed we run fewer tasks in parrallel. This PR sets the limit to 10. previously, we used the default value 3.
If reviewers prefer a different number than 10, I'm happy to change it. On my local build this led to good results but mileage may vary.
Speed comparison on my local machine (3 vs 10 tasks in parallel)
yarn clean: 16s vs 10syarn build:tarball: 135s vs 98sCloses #19444 (added automatically)