I guess the CI won't tell us anything (the large memory tests are not ran by default). Feel free to try in your local @pitrou . Thanks.

I guess the CI won't tell us anything (the large memory tests are not ran by default).

Yes. For the record, I've opened #46600 for it (and this is how I found out that this test was failing).

Rebased in the hope of getting greener CI./

Rebased in the hope of getting greener CI./

Well, of course, this is a bit futile since the test won't run anyway. I'll merge :)

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 4 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit c2fb0e3.

There were 68 benchmark results with an error:

• Commit Run on arm64-t4g-2xlarge-linux at 2025-06-02 18:41:23Z
  • tpch (R) with engine=arrow, format=parquet, language=R, memory_map=False, query_id=TPCH-07, scale_factor=1
  • tpch (R) with engine=arrow, format=native, language=R, memory_map=False, query_id=TPCH-09, scale_factor=1
• and 66 more (see the report linked below)

There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉

The full Conbench report has more details. It also includes information about 4 possible false positives for unstable benchmarks that are known to sometimes produce them.