perf(local): don't read the entire zip into memory#2445
Merged
Conversation
Codecov Report❌ Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2445 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 67.83% 67.79% -0.04%
==========================================
Files 172 172
Lines 13290 13301 +11
==========================================
+ Hits 9015 9018 +3
- Misses 3569 3573 +4
- Partials 706 710 +4 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
another-rex
reviewed
Jan 7, 2026
This reverts commit f59188e.
another-rex
approved these changes
Jan 8, 2026
G-Rath
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 9, 2026
Since #2445 has us stream bytes to and from disk rather than writing the entire contents in one go, it's no longer safe for tests to be using the databases in parallel so we always need to use a unique directory
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
I'm a little suspect of the results I've produced, but it seems like this reduces memory usage by a decent amount e.g. with the Ubuntu SBOM used for #2217 we go from 1gb to 200mb total.
Ultimately, I think the theory is sound and that are not really any downsides so we might as well change this.
Note that this does not have any impact on scanning speed, just memory usage.