Logperf7

[ClaudeROSSI]

No description provided.

[ClaudeROSSI]

@OliveGerste : Tobias, can you help?
We have a smartcharging test failing ... I think I didn't merge properly some changes, but I do not find which one.
Can you please have a look to the failing test?
Any hint would be helpful!

[OliveGerste]

@OliveGerste : Tobias, can you help? We have a smartcharging test failing ... I think I didn't merge properly some changes, but I do not find which one. Can you please have a look to the failing test? Any hint would be helpful!

Hi @ClaudeROSSI,

Not an easy one to be honest. The fault is not on your side:

Short answer: Performance is too good now.
Long answer: The test assumes that the first transaction starts shortly before the second one. Normally this worked because the code execution took more time, so that we had 1 second difference between the transaction starts.
Due to the performance increase they start at the exact same time and the parameters are exactly the same which leads to another order how the the transactions are prioritised.
I provided a PR to fix this #4173
Let me know if this is sufficient.

[CLAassistant]

Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you all sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
2 out of 3 committers have signed the CLA.

✅ ClaudeROSSI
✅ OliveGerste
❌ lmargaron
_{You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.}