[bompus]

Against upstream's current main, the fork indexes n8n 1.3 times faster (66.3 s against 84.5 s on Node), syncs one edited file 3.0 times faster and is better in 65 of 74 comparisons, about the same in 4 and worse in 5.

The README's "Measured results" quoted the 2026-10-14 run (fork ba972275, upstream 3f714bcc). Since then the fork gained the mid-size resolver pool (#506), the Kotlin, regex-cache and WAL-checkpoint changes (#515 to #519), imported-constant member links (#523) and the markup arrow-parameter guard (#526). This repeats the same run with the same scripts, corpora, arms and quiet-host rule on fork 633fc82c and upstream 986de95c (Node 24.22.0, Bun 1.4.3, 16-vCPU WSL2 host, mirrored arm order, index median of 2, sync median of 4). The fork lacks one upstream commit, 986de95c, a Vue import fix, so the arms differ in it. Protocol written before the first timed run; no attempt was rejected; all steps returned 0 apart from upstream's supabase syncs, which fail with FOREIGN KEY constraint failed as before (colbymchenry#2565) and stay out of the 74.

What moved in the README, Node arms (the full tables are in the new doc):

Measure	2026-10-14	2026-10-18	Note
n8n index, upstream → fork	88.3 s → 71.2 s (1.2×)	84.5 s → 66.3 s (1.3×)
CPython index, upstream → fork	47.1 s → 41.1 s	40.2 s → 33.3 s (17% faster)
pretix index, upstream → fork	9.85 s → 11.3 s (+15%)	8.36 s → 9.40 s (+13%)	still slower
Alamofire index peak memory	809 MiB → 668 MiB	830 MiB → 953 MiB (+15%)	now includes the pool change (#506); the old row predated it
n8n one-file sync	14.0 s → 4.72 s (3.0×)	13.1 s → 4.37 s (3.0×)
n8n warm explore	700 ms → 203 ms	600 ms → 177 ms
Tally	61 better, 6 same, 7 worse	65 better, 4 same, 5 worse

The worse five are pretix indexing (+13% Node, +20% Bun) and index memory on Alamofire (+15% Node) and pretix (+11% Node, +6% Bun). Each percentage is a median of two runs, so a difference within 3% is called no clear change, and the host was faster than on 10-14, so compare ratios between arms and not seconds across runs. Not measured: Windows and macOS, a second Bun or Node version.

Changes: README.md (Measured results, the four tables, the Node-or-Bun paragraph, the "Slower to index" bullet), assets/fork-vs-upstream-performance.svg (version tag bumped to ?v=4), the new docs/benchmarks/fork-vs-upstream-node-bun-2026-10-18.md and its heatmap. The 10-14 doc stays as a dated record. Every figure comes from render-charts.mjs and a script over the raw rows; the README tallies come from the chart renderer.

README rows checked: the "Measured results" intro, chart alt text, the full-index, sync, MCP and CLI tables, the Alamofire note and the Python-regression paragraph, the Node-or-Bun paragraph, and the "What it costs" bullets. Unchanged on purpose: the mid-size paragraph (its own 10-15 and 10-17 measurements), database size and edge-count bullets (the percentages round to the same values). readme-sync and check:agent-docs pass.

---

Summary by cubic

Re-runs the fork-vs-upstream benchmark on the current commits (fork 633fc82c against upstream 986de95c) and updates the README's Measured results with the new numbers, chart, and benchmark doc. The fork now indexes n8n 1.3× faster, syncs an edited file 3.0× faster, and is better in 65 of 74 comparisons (up from 61). The run includes the recent resolver pool, Kotlin, regex-cache, WAL-checkpoint, and import-link changes, so Alamofire's index memory is now higher (+15% on Node). The 2026-10-14 doc stays as a dated record.

^{Written for commit 0a96fc1. Summary will update on new commits.}

[coderabbitai]

Important

• 🔍 Trigger review

This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars.

⚙️ Run configuration

• Configuration used: Repository YAML (base), Organization UI (inherited)
• Review profile: CHILL
• Plan: Advanced
• Run ID: 4eed92b2-0767-456b-84e5-996b7b8a0038

• Autofix · Keep fixing CodeRabbit findings and required CI, and resolving merge conflicts

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[greptile-apps]

Confidence Score: 5/5

[Low impact] The documentation changes appear safe to merge.

Summary

Refreshes the README and benchmark charts with the 2026-10-18 comparison of fork 633fc82c against upstream 986de95c.

• The README now shows the October 18 benchmark results.

_{Reviews (1) · Last reviewed commit: "docs: re-run the fork-vs-upstream benchm..." · Reviewed by Greptile}