Open
Conversation
LukasTy
added
the
scope: code-infra
oliviertassinari
temporarily deployed
to
bump-node-to-v24 - mui-tools-public PR #1239
Render
Destroyed
Bundle size report
Check out the code infra dashboard for more information about this PR. |
Member
Author
|
I wanted to bring up this topic due to noticing that GH actions are bumping to node 24 on their end. Do we plan to keep using v22 until it goes out of maintenance mode? |
Member
If I read the notion doc correctly, I think that would be the intention, unless there are significant gains. But have to admit that it's not 100% clear to me the way it is written. |
oliviertassinari
temporarily deployed
to
bump-node-to-v24 - code-infra-dashboard PR #1239
Render
Destroyed
github-actions
Bot
added
the
PR: out-of-date
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Testing it out in: mui/base-ui#4423
CI Performance: Node 22 (#6168) vs Node 24 (#6182)
I chose 6168 pipeline due to it having the new docs infra as well as triggering the
pnpm dedupe.The results show no meaningful performance improvement or degradation outside of run-to-run variance.
Job-Level Comparison
* Heavily influenced by spin-up time variance (CircleCI infrastructure noise)
Step-Level Breakdown (excluding spin-up noise)
Key Findings
Actual tool execution is neutral. ESLint (43s vs 44s), TypeScript (8s vs 9s), vitest (26s vs 25s), Validate docs (35s vs 35s), and Build packages (9s vs 8s) are all within ±1s — measurement noise.
pnpm dedupe is 4s faster on Node 24 (23s → 19s), the only meaningful improvement in actual work.
pnpm install is inconsistent. Two jobs (test_package, Validating Docs) saw +9-10s install regressions, while others were identical. This is likely cache variance rather than a systematic Node 24 issue — the same
pnpm installcommand takes 26-40s across different jobs on Node 24, suggesting it depends on when the pnpm store cache was hit.Spin-up times dominate the job-level differences. Node 22's checkout job had a 1m 59s spin-up vs 3s on Node 24; test_lint had 24s vs 5s. These are CircleCI Docker image pull/allocation times, not Node performance.
Total excluding spin-up: 355s (Node 22) vs 369s (Node 24) = +14s (+4%) slower on Node 24, almost entirely from install time variance in 2 jobs.
Verdict
Node 24 is performance-neutral for actual code execution. The observed ±1s differences in ESLint, TypeScript, vitest, and builds are within noise. The only real signal is pnpm dedupe being slightly faster (-4s). The +14s aggregate "regression" is driven by pnpm install cache variance in 2 of 6 jobs, not by Node 24 being slower at running JavaScript. A single re-run could flip this result.