-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.6k
Large performance regression in v2.0 #649
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Comments
Dang, yeah, something seems to not be properly detecting + rejecting CommonJS deps before parsing (which is what eats all the time). See discussion on #615 for a workaround using settings: {
"import/resolver": "webpack",
"import/extensions": ['.js'],
"import/ignore": ['node_modules']
} Beware, though, that it will not lint imported names/defaults for your When I add debug logging to start digging into this, I may ping you and ask for some logs, if you're up for that. The v2 logic is not substantially different, so it should not be anywhere near that much slower. |
Sure. Happy to help. I've downgraded to v1.x, which should work fine for me in the short-term! |
BTW, running ESLint with the Watching the logs scroll by, each file is taking a long time to process, but the "timed" tasks listed in the log all claim to be very fast, despite an obvious 2-3 second pause between files.
|
MUCH better. Thanks for the quick fix! v1.16.0
v2.0.1:
v2.2.0
|
I'm observing a very large performance hit between v1.x and v2.0.1. Linting my project used to take approximately 13 seconds with v1.x, and now takes about 25 minutes with v2.0.1.
I'm using ESLint v3.9.1,
eslint-plugin-import
v2.0.1,eslint-import-resolver-webpack
v0.6.0, andbabel-eslint
v7.1.0.I've tried reverting to earlier versions each of those packages, and I only see a noticeable performance regression with
eslint-plugin-import
v2.0.x.My
.eslintrc.js
is as follows:I can't release the source code of my project, but would be happy to help track down this bug by some other means. I've already thrown a profiler on the process, and unfortunately didn't see anything particularly interesting...
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: