Skip to content

chore(main): release 0.48.2#167

Merged
tstapler merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
release-please--branches--main
Jun 18, 2026
Merged

chore(main): release 0.48.2#167
tstapler merged 2 commits into
mainfrom
release-please--branches--main

Conversation

@github-actions

@github-actions github-actions Bot commented Jun 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🤖 I have created a release beep boop

0.48.2 (2026-06-18)

Bug Fixes

  • git: wire JvmGitRepository on desktop and keep OAuth code visible during polling (#166) (00df575)
  • watcher: journals page live refresh + Android detection reliability (#165) (27bf06d)

This PR was generated with Release Please. See documentation.

@github-actions github-actions Bot force-pushed the release-please--branches--main branch from bfc3ec9 to 545673a Compare June 18, 2026 00:50
@tstapler tstapler merged commit 4aef2d7 into main Jun 18, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

🤖 Created releases:

🌻

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

JVM Load Benchmark (Desktop)

Synthetic in-memory benchmark measuring load performance for the desktop (JVM) app.
Comparing 00df5755 (this PR) vs 00df5755 (baseline)
Graph config: xlarge — 230 pages

Metric This PR Baseline Delta
Phase 1 TTI ↓ 0ms 0ms 0 (0%)
Phase 2 background ↓ 0ms 0ms 0 (0%)
Phase 3 index ↓ 0ms 0ms 0 (0%)
Total ↓ 0ms 0ms 0 (0%)
Write p95 (baseline) ↓ 41ms 41ms 0 (0%)
Write p95 (under load) ↓ n/a n/a
Jank factor ↓ n/a n/a
↓ lower is better
Flamegraphs (this PR) **Allocation** — object allocation pressure (JDBC/SQLite churn)

Alloc flamegraph not available

CPU — method-level hotspots by on-CPU time

CPU flamegraph not available

Top SQL queries by total time (this PR) | table:operation | calls | p50 | p99 | max | total | |-----------------|-------|-----|-----|-----|-------| | `blocks_fts:insert` | 2 | 1ms | 1ms | 0ms | 0ms | | `pages:select` | 2 | 1ms | 1ms | 0ms | 0ms |
Top allocation hotspots (this PR) `39.8%` byte[]_[k] `8.4%` java.util.LinkedHashMap$Entry_[k] `7%` java.lang.String_[k] `5.9%` int[]_[k] `3.6%` java.lang.Object[]_[k]
Top CPU hotspots (this PR) `96%` /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc.so.6 `1.1%` /tmp/sqlite-3.51.3.0-9c330abf-fd08-45e4-969c-d815f384d314-libsqlitejdbc.so `0.8%` fsync `0.2%` pthread_cond_signal `0.2%` __libc_pwrite

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Android Load Benchmark

Instrumented benchmark on an API 30 x86_64 emulator — 500-page synthetic graph.

Comparing 8d6cf586 (this PR) vs 00df5755 (baseline)
Device: API 30 x86_64 emulator — 530 pages loaded

Graph Load

Metric This PR Baseline Delta
Phase 1 TTI ↓ 66ms 61ms +5ms (+8%) ⚠️
Phase 3 index ↓ 7066ms 6594ms +472ms (+7%) ⚠️

Interactive Write Latency (during Phase 3)

Metric This PR Baseline Delta
Write p95 (baseline) ↓ 14ms 12ms +2ms (+17%) ⚠️
Write p95 (during phase 3) ↓ 30ms 21ms +9ms (+43%) ⚠️
Jank factor ↓ 2.14x 1.75x +0.39x (+22%) ⚠️
Concurrent writes ↑ 36 32 +4ms (+13%) ✅

SAF I/O Overhead (ContentProvider vs direct File read)

Measures Binder IPC cost added by ContentResolver per readFile() call.
Real SAF via ExternalStorageProvider will be higher on device; this is a lower bound.

Metric This PR Baseline Delta
Direct read / file ↓ 0.0ms 0.0ms 0 (0%)
Provider read / file ↓ 0.2ms 0.2ms 0 (0%)
IPC overhead ratio ↓ 5x 5x 0 (0%)
↓ lower is better · ↑ higher is better

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant