feat(cadence-matching): simplify the load calculation for shards#7647
Merged
eleonoradgr merged 1 commit intocadence-workflow:masterfrom Feb 11, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Signed-off-by: edigregorio <edigregorio@uber.com>
Code Review ✅ ApprovedClean refactoring that simplifies load calculation by adding a direct QPS accessor method, eliminating unnecessary blocking during startup. The change is well-tested and maintains functional equivalence. Rules ❌ No requirements metRepository Rules
OptionsAuto-apply is off → Gitar will not commit updates to this branch. Comment with these commands to change:
Was this helpful? React with 👍 / 👎 | Gitar |
|
Updated the PR title to follow conventional commit format: changed from |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
What changed?
Instead of relying on LoadBalancerHints for load calculation, we rely on a new method QueriesPerSecond, which is only providing the value we are interested in
Why?
This is a more efficient way to get the load, since startWG.Wait() which is invoked in the LoadBalancerHints is stopping until the tasklist is started, but we don't really need to wait at startup, since the load will be 0.
How did you test it?
unit tests
Potential risks
no risk, we are using the same value right now
Release notes
Documentation Changes