Set tipChanged subject's buffer size to 1

[moreal]

This pull request updates the buffer size of subscription.tipChanged API's subject to 1. Without the limitation, the ReplaySubject uses int.MaxValue as its buffer size. It is very useless to provide tipChanged subscription feature. It just causes too many subscription responses and uses too much memory.

When I tested with launcher, it works well.

[area363]

@moreal Tests don't seem to finish 😲

[moreal]

@moreal Tests don't seem to finish 😲

@area363 oops.. I guess tipChanged query test may be broken. I'll fix it 🙆‍♂️

[area363]

@moreal Could you take a look at this lint error? (https://github.com/planetarium/NineChronicles.Headless/actions/runs/6193775290/job/16815783641?pr=2245#step:4:34)

[moreal]

@moreal Could you take a look at this lint error? (planetarium/NineChronicles.Headless/actions/runs/6193775290/job/16815783641?pr=2245#step:4:34)

I fixed it!

[area363]

@moreal https://github.com/planetarium/NineChronicles.Headless/actions/runs/6195442164/job/16821210098?pr=2245#step:5:5294 Not sure why this keeps failing 😅

[pull-request-quantifier-deprecated]

This PR has 9 quantified lines of changes. In general, a change size of upto 200 lines is ideal for the best PR experience!

---

Quantification details

Label      : Extra Small
Size       : +5 -4
Percentile : 3.6%

Total files changed: 2

Change summary by file extension:
.cs : +5 -4

Change counts above are quantified counts, based on the PullRequestQuantifier customizations.

Why proper sizing of changes matters

Optimal pull request sizes drive a better predictable PR flow as they strike a
balance between between PR complexity and PR review overhead. PRs within the
optimal size (typical small, or medium sized PRs) mean:

• Fast and predictable releases to production:
  • Optimal size changes are more likely to be reviewed faster with fewer
    iterations.
  • Similarity in low PR complexity drives similar review times.
• Review quality is likely higher as complexity is lower:
  • Bugs are more likely to be detected.
  • Code inconsistencies are more likely to be detected.
• Knowledge sharing is improved within the participants:
  • Small portions can be assimilated better.
• Better engineering practices are exercised:
  • Solving big problems by dividing them in well contained, smaller problems.
  • Exercising separation of concerns within the code changes.

What can I do to optimize my changes

• Use the PullRequestQuantifier to quantify your PR accurately
  • Create a context profile for your repo using the context generator
  • Exclude files that are not necessary to be reviewed or do not increase the review complexity. Example: Autogenerated code, docs, project IDE setting files, binaries, etc. Check out the Excluded section from your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Understand your typical change complexity, drive towards the desired complexity by adjusting the label mapping in your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
  • Only use the labels that matter to you, see context specification to customize your prquantifier.yaml context profile.
• Change your engineering behaviors
  • For PRs that fall outside of the desired spectrum, review the details and check if:
    • Your PR could be split in smaller, self-contained PRs instead
    • Your PR only solves one particular issue. (For example, don't refactor and code new features in the same PR).

How to interpret the change counts in git diff output

• One line was added: +1 -0
• One line was deleted: +0 -1
• One line was modified: +1 -1 (git diff doesn't know about modified, it will
  interpret that line like one addition plus one deletion)
• Change percentiles: Change characteristics (addition, deletion, modification)
  of this PR in relation to all other PRs within the repository.

---

Was this comment helpful? 👍  :ok_hand:  :thumbsdown: (Email)
Customize PullRequestQuantifier for this repository.

[moreal]

@moreal planetarium/NineChronicles.Headless/actions/runs/6195442164/job/16821210098?pr=2245#step:5:5294 Not sure why this keeps failing 😅

@area363 Thanks for letting me know that 🙏🏻 I think it is a timing issue between the subscription timing and the reactive processor's timing (System.Reactive). I just added a delay function to pass that issue simply at this time. Could you review it again?

[area363]

🚀