docs: record footprint and performance metrics#67
Conversation
Add a hand-verified metrics reference (docs/current-metrics.md) with re-derivation commands for LOC, installed storage footprint, and runtime query overhead. Surface the headline figures in a README.md table and a readme.txt "Performance & Footprint" section. Key facts recorded: static save() output means zero added DB queries per page (no render_callback, options, cron, custom tables, or CPTs), ~2.2 MB installed footprint, and a ~1.4 KB front-end runtime. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #67 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 80.80% 80.80%
=======================================
Files 44 44
Lines 3084 3084
Branches 523 523
=======================================
Hits 2492 2492
Misses 185 185
Partials 407 407 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
![chatgpt-codex-connector[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/1144995?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: c33fd45617
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
This PR records and surfaces the plugin’s footprint/performance characteristics by adding a canonical metrics document and summarizing the headline numbers in both GitHub and WordPress.org readmes.
Changes:
- Added
docs/current-metrics.mdwith re-derivation commands for LOC, installed footprint, and runtime/query overhead. - Added a “Footprint & Performance” section to
README.md(GitHub) with a metrics table and link to the canonical doc. - Added a “Performance & Footprint” section to
readme.txt(WP.org) describing the same runtime/footprint story in WP readme format.
Reviewed changes
Copilot reviewed 3 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 4 comments.
| File | Description |
|---|---|
readme.txt |
Adds WP.org-formatted performance/footprint section describing static save() output and headline metrics. |
README.md |
Adds GitHub “Footprint & Performance” section with a summary metrics table and link to the metrics doc. |
docs/current-metrics.md |
New canonical, command-backed metrics reference for LOC, installed size, and runtime/query overhead. |
💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.
Address automated review on PR #67 (Codex P2 + Copilot): - wp_options: the editor-time cache (bibliography_builder_cache_set) falls back to non-autoloaded, expiring _transient_bbb_* rows when no persistent object cache is present. Narrow the "0 rows / no persistent storage / creates no options" wording to "no autoloaded options / no long-lived settings" and document the editor-only transient fallback. The frontend "0 added queries per page" claim is unchanged and correct. - packages/ is not a separate shipped component: package-release.sh rm -rf's the staged packages/ after Composer installs those path packages into vendor/citation-style-language/*. Fold the 60 KB into the vendor/ figure; installed total corrected ~2.2 MB -> ~2.1 MB. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: 3e619e30a1
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Address Codex re-review P3 notes on PR #67: - The editor-time cache calls both wp_cache_set() and set_transient() unconditionally (two independent function_exists guards), not an object-cache-else-transient fallback. With a persistent object cache no wp_options row is written; without one, set_transient() materializes the non-autoloaded _transient_bbb_* rows. Reword the caveat to match. - DOI imports are deduped in a browser-session JS Map (src/lib/parser.js), not the PHP object/transient cache (only the formatter and pmid groups exist server-side). Drop DOI from the server-side caching claim in both readmes and note the browser-session dedupe instead. The first-party PHP LOC (1,982) is unchanged: the documented command counts the three generated build/*.asset.php stubs. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
@codex review |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 Codex Review
Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.
Reviewed commit: dec30ba15c
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub
Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
- Open a pull request for review
- Mark a draft as ready
- Comment "@codex review".
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.
Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".
Address Codex re-review P3 notes on PR #67: - build/ is gitignored (produced by npm run build), so counting it made the first-party PHP LOC environment-dependent: 1,982 in a built tree vs 1,979 on a clean checkout (the three generated build/*.asset.php stubs). Exclude build/ from the LOC command for a stable 1,979. - package-release.sh copies the gitignored build/, so the installed footprint recipe fails on a clean checkout without building first. Add an explicit `npm run build` prerequisite, and to the view.js row. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
@codex review |
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Hooray! Reviewed commit: ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubYour team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback". |
What
Puts the plugin's size and runtime overhead on record and surfaces the headline figures in both readmes.
docs/current-metrics.md— hand-verified metrics reference. Every number carries the exact command to re-derive it (LOC, installed storage footprint, runtime query overhead), plus the persistence-audit grep that should returnNONE.README.md— new "Footprint & Performance" section with a table, linking to the metrics doc.readme.txt— new "Performance & Footprint" section in WordPress.org list format (no markdown tables, which the WP.org parser mangles).Headline numbers (verified against
main@49f623b)src/)view.js~1.4 KB +style-index.css~2.9 KB, only when the block is presentrender_callbackThe static
save()architecture (norender_callback) is why the visitor path adds zero queries and zero server-side formatting — all citeproc + Crossref/NCBI work is editor-only.Risk
Docs-only, no code touched. Reviewer agent re-derived every measurable figure (all exact matches) and confirmed the three files are internally consistent.
vendor/release-build sizes (~1.0 MB pruned, ~2.2 MB total) aren't installed in the working tree but each carries a re-derivation command and is consistent with the measured components.🤖 Generated with Claude Code