📊 Performance Regression Detected
Benchmark: FindIncludesInContent
Current Performance: 22,564 ns/op (22.56μs)
Historical Average: 16,872 ns/op (16.87μs)
Change: +33.8% slower
Data Points: 5 historical runs
📈 Detailed Performance Metrics
Performance Comparison
- Current: 22.56μs (22,564 ns/op)
- Historical Avg: 16.87μs (16,872 ns/op)
- Change: +33.8%
- Memory: 13,405 B/op, 20 allocs/op
Context
All other benchmarks showed significant improvements today:
- CompileSimpleWorkflow: -57.0%
- CompileComplexWorkflow: -61.4%
- CompileMCPWorkflow: -84.7%
- ParseWorkflow: -65.0%
- Validation: -96.1%
The FindIncludesInContent regression may be noise given the small absolute values (~22μs vs ~17μs), but warrants investigation.
Baseline Targets
- Simple workflows: <100ms ✅
- Complex workflows: <500ms ✅
- MCP-heavy workflows: <1s ✅
💡 Recommended Actions
- Review recent changes to include-finding logic in the compilation pipeline
- Run
make bench-memory to generate memory profiles
- Use
go tool pprof to identify hotspots
- Monitor in upcoming daily runs to confirm regression vs. noise
📋 Additional Context
References:
Generated by Daily CLI Performance Agent · ● 740.3K · ◷
📊 Performance Regression Detected
Benchmark: FindIncludesInContent
Current Performance: 22,564 ns/op (22.56μs)
Historical Average: 16,872 ns/op (16.87μs)
Change: +33.8% slower
Data Points: 5 historical runs
📈 Detailed Performance Metrics
Performance Comparison
Context
All other benchmarks showed significant improvements today:
The FindIncludesInContent regression may be noise given the small absolute values (~22μs vs ~17μs), but warrants investigation.
Baseline Targets
💡 Recommended Actions
make bench-memoryto generate memory profilesgo tool pprofto identify hotspots📋 Additional Context
References: