Skip to content
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

chore(deps): upgrade @sanity/asset-utils to v2 #7584

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 4, 2024

Conversation

rexxars
Copy link
Member

@rexxars rexxars commented Oct 3, 2024

Description

Just a dependency update. v2 of this module uses ESM by default, aside from that there shouldn't be any meaningful changes.

What to review

Stuff still works. In particular, image and file fields + copy/paste of these fields.

Testing

Existing tests should hopefully be enough.
Have done some manual testing as well.

Notes for release

None

@rexxars rexxars requested a review from a team as a code owner October 3, 2024 21:40
@rexxars rexxars requested review from binoy14 and removed request for a team October 3, 2024 21:40
Copy link

vercel bot commented Oct 3, 2024

The latest updates on your projects. Learn more about Vercel for Git ↗︎

Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
page-building-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Oct 3, 2024 9:48pm
performance-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Oct 3, 2024 9:48pm
test-compiled-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Oct 3, 2024 9:48pm
test-next-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Oct 3, 2024 9:48pm
test-studio ✅ Ready (Inspect) Visit Preview 💬 Add feedback Oct 3, 2024 9:48pm
1 Skipped Deployment
Name Status Preview Comments Updated (UTC)
studio-workshop ⬜️ Ignored (Inspect) Oct 3, 2024 9:48pm

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2024

No changes to documentation

Copy link

New dependencies detected. Learn more about Socket for GitHub ↗︎

Package New capabilities Transitives Size Publisher
npm/@sanity/[email protected] None 0 277 kB sanity-io

View full report↗︎

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2024

Component Testing Report Updated Oct 3, 2024 9:53 PM (UTC)

✅ All Tests Passed -- expand for details
File Status Duration Passed Skipped Failed
comments/CommentInput.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 47s 15 0 0
formBuilder/ArrayInput.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 8s 3 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Annotations.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 30s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/copyPaste/CopyPaste.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 36s 11 7 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/copyPaste/CopyPasteFields.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 12 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Decorators.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 17s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/DisableFocusAndUnset.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 10s 3 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/DragAndDrop.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 3m 0s 0 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/FocusTracking.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 43s 15 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Input.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 35s 21 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/ObjectBlock.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 1m 15s 18 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/PresenceCursors.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 9s 3 9 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/RangeDecoration.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 25s 9 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Styles.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 18s 6 0 0
formBuilder/inputs/PortableText/Toolbar.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 34s 12 0 0
formBuilder/tree-editing/TreeEditing.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 3 0
formBuilder/tree-editing/TreeEditingNestedObjects.spec.tsx ✅ Passed (Inspect) 0s 0 3 0

Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Oct 3, 2024

⚡️ Editor Performance Report

Updated Thu, 03 Oct 2024 22:00:20 GMT

Benchmark reference
latency of sanity@latest
experiment
latency of this branch
Δ (%)
latency difference
article (title) 17.5 efps (57ms) 17.7 efps (57ms) -1ms (-0.9%)
article (body) 53.6 efps (19ms) 56.2 efps (18ms) -1ms (-4.6%)
article (string inside object) 18.2 efps (55ms) 18.9 efps (53ms) -2ms (-3.6%)
article (string inside array) 14.2 efps (71ms) 15.2 efps (66ms) -5ms (-6.4%)
recipe (name) 31.3 efps (32ms) 30.8 efps (33ms) +1ms (+1.6%)
recipe (description) 34.5 efps (29ms) 33.3 efps (30ms) +1ms (+3.4%)
recipe (instructions) 99.9+ efps (6ms) 99.9+ efps (7ms) +1ms (-/-%)
synthetic (title) 15.2 efps (66ms) 15.2 efps (66ms) +0ms (-/-%)
synthetic (string inside object) 15.9 efps (63ms) 15.9 efps (63ms) +0ms (-/-%)

efps — editor "frames per second". The number of updates assumed to be possible within a second.

Derived from input latency. efps = 1000 / input_latency

Detailed information

🏠 Reference result

The performance result of sanity@latest

Benchmark latency p75 p90 p99 blocking time test duration
article (title) 57ms 62ms 106ms 203ms 1321ms 14.5s
article (body) 19ms 21ms 26ms 143ms 288ms 6.2s
article (string inside object) 55ms 58ms 64ms 99ms 966ms 8.8s
article (string inside array) 71ms 76ms 83ms 162ms 1795ms 10.4s
recipe (name) 32ms 35ms 41ms 90ms 40ms 9.2s
recipe (description) 29ms 30ms 33ms 60ms 26ms 6.1s
recipe (instructions) 6ms 9ms 9ms 27ms 0ms 3.3s
synthetic (title) 66ms 69ms 88ms 286ms 1997ms 17.6s
synthetic (string inside object) 63ms 66ms 77ms 115ms 1406ms 9.4s

🧪 Experiment result

The performance result of this branch

Benchmark latency p75 p90 p99 blocking time test duration
article (title) 57ms 62ms 71ms 173ms 1144ms 14.3s
article (body) 18ms 19ms 22ms 123ms 228ms 5.6s
article (string inside object) 53ms 58ms 65ms 164ms 842ms 8.8s
article (string inside array) 66ms 70ms 84ms 176ms 1670ms 9.8s
recipe (name) 33ms 36ms 54ms 79ms 99ms 9.3s
recipe (description) 30ms 33ms 39ms 86ms 86ms 6.5s
recipe (instructions) 7ms 9ms 10ms 34ms 0ms 3.4s
synthetic (title) 66ms 71ms 97ms 461ms 2434ms 17.2s
synthetic (string inside object) 63ms 65ms 80ms 400ms 1941ms 9.8s

📚 Glossary

column definitions

  • benchmark — the name of the test, e.g. "article", followed by the label of the field being measured, e.g. "(title)".
  • latency — the time between when a key was pressed and when it was rendered. derived from a set of samples. the median (p50) is shown to show the most common latency.
  • p75 — the 75th percentile of the input latency in the test run. 75% of the sampled inputs in this benchmark were processed faster than this value. this provides insight into the upper range of typical performance.
  • p90 — the 90th percentile of the input latency in the test run. 90% of the sampled inputs were faster than this. this metric helps identify slower interactions that occurred less frequently during the benchmark.
  • p99 — the 99th percentile of the input latency in the test run. only 1% of sampled inputs were slower than this. this represents the worst-case scenarios encountered during the benchmark, useful for identifying potential performance outliers.
  • blocking time — the total time during which the main thread was blocked, preventing user input and UI updates. this metric helps identify performance bottlenecks that may cause the interface to feel unresponsive.
  • test duration — how long the test run took to complete.

Copy link
Contributor

@binoy14 binoy14 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks like sanity-plugin-hotspot-array and @sanity/import use 1.3.0 upgrading those should only keep one version of the asset-utils in the lockfile

@rexxars
Copy link
Member Author

rexxars commented Oct 4, 2024

Will update those, thanks!

@rexxars rexxars added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 4, 2024
Merged via the queue into next with commit f1f9c51 Oct 4, 2024
52 checks passed
@rexxars rexxars deleted the chore/upgrade-asset-utils branch October 4, 2024 20:13
ricokahler pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2024
### Description

Just a dependency update. v2 of this module uses ESM by default, aside
from that there shouldn't be any meaningful changes.

### What to review

Stuff still works. In particular, image and file fields + copy/paste of
these fields.

### Testing

Existing tests should hopefully be enough.
Have done some manual testing as well.

### Notes for release

None
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants