-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
Implement suggestion from digisaster #206
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
Conversation
Collect Stick NodeInfo
|
Important Review skippedAuto reviews are disabled on base/target branches other than the default branch. Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the You can disable this status message by setting the Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
CodeRabbit Configuration File (
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## async #206 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 81.16% 81.14% -0.02%
==========================================
Files 36 36
Lines 7364 7367 +3
==========================================
+ Hits 5977 5978 +1
- Misses 1387 1389 +2 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
bouwew
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we increase this delay a bit more?
|
|
I was thinking, in the Integration (async) there are these lines: |
| missing_addresses = sorted(missing_addresses, reverse=True) | ||
| for address in missing_addresses: | ||
| await self.energy_log_update(address) | ||
| await sleep(0.1) # Test with a small delay |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The sleep should not be necessary at all. Adding it masks the real issue at the submit queue.
Any "communication overload" should be handled properly at the submit queue so we are able to do all the energy requests in a single gather request.
|
Closing this PR, @digisaster comfirms that the present async-code does not show the high utilization. |



As described on Discord: "het maakt net even het verschil tussen 100% CPU of 6% (op mijn raspberry)".