Skip to content

fix missing share randomization in decoding benchmark#395

Open
Ocheretovich wants to merge 2 commits intocelestiaorg:mainfrom
Ocheretovich:main
Open

fix missing share randomization in decoding benchmark#395
Ocheretovich wants to merge 2 commits intocelestiaorg:mainfrom
Ocheretovich:main

Conversation

@Ocheretovich
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Fix decoding benchmark to randomize missing shares across all shares, not only data

Signed-off-by: Ocheretovich Oksana <ocheretovich@gmail.com>
@gemini-code-assist
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Summary of Changes

Hello @Ocheretovich, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request addresses a bug in the decoding benchmark where missing shares were not being randomized correctly. The fix ensures that the randomization process considers all shares, leading to more accurate benchmark results.

Highlights

  • Bug Fix: The decoding benchmark was incorrectly randomizing missing shares, leading to inaccurate performance measurements.
  • Share Randomization: The fix ensures that missing shares are randomized across all shares, not just the data shares.
  • Benchmark Accuracy: This change improves the accuracy and reliability of the decoding benchmark.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Changelog
  • codec_test.go
    • Modified the generateMissingData function to randomize missing shares across all shares instead of only data shares.
Activity
  • The pull request author, Ocheretovich, has addressed an issue in the decoding benchmark.
  • The change involves modifying the generateMissingData function in codec_test.go.
Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature Command Description
Code Review /gemini review Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary /gemini summary Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment @gemini-code-assist Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help /gemini help Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

  1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@gemini-code-assist gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Code Review

This pull request correctly fixes an issue in the decoding benchmark where missing shares were only selected from the original data shares. The change is correct. I have added one comment on a related issue in the same function to improve the benchmark's correctness and robustness.

Signed-off-by: Ocheretovich Oksana <ocheretovich@gmail.com>
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.

1 participant