There was no benchmark harness of any kind -- no benches/, no criterion,
no synthetic fixture -- while §8 promised a suite run per commit that
fails the build on regression. Ten performance requirements could be
neither passed nor failed.
tools/bench builds a deterministic 50,000-row catalog over a pool of
twelve generated JPEGs, about 14 MB, reproducible from a seed, with a
stamp so it rebuilds rather than silently comparing against a different
workload. It depends on nothing GPU or UI, which is what makes the CI job
affordable.
NFR-P1 and NFR-P3 are gated and tagged. NFR-P7, NFR-P8 and R2 are
measured but deliberately untagged: the export gate is one-sided, the
memory figure is the catalog layer's share rather than the whole, and
R2's first sentence is a 60 fps scroll a catalog benchmark cannot claim.
Every recorded value in the baseline is null. Nobody has run this on the
reference desktop, and a fabricated figure would make every later
comparison a comparison against a guess.
First run on this machine: catalog opens in 70 ms against a 2 s budget,
and thumbnail throughput measures 37 img/s against a target of 100 --
reported rather than asserted here, and the first evidence that the
target may not hold.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
dtourolleandClaude Opus 5
745f3a98c7