Tagging subscribers to this area: @ViktorHofer
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

there can be also WSL-specific performance issues, e.g. #24839

It would be nice to matrix it into the rolling runs somehow. What distro would be most interesting? I assume we need both WSL1 and WSL2 represented?

@jaredpar owns this matrix.

I wouldn't invest in WSL1. There are multiple test failures with it, because of the kernel not being complete.

I wonder whether we would be confident enough to drop tests on distro X (presumably in docker) in favor of X in WSL2.

AFAIK WSL2 remains to be a development only environment. I think we should always prefer execution environments over development only environments in our testing. Just my 5c.

To be a useful development environment the tests need to reliably pass.

WSL2 remains to be a development only environment

this is true, but there are some tools like PowerShell Core that need to work properly in this environment ;)

I think we should always prefer execution environments over development only environments in our testing.

I agree. This is why we should most probably add new CI leg(s) rather that change the existing ones

What distro would be most interesting?

You could start with Ubuntu LTS 18/20.

there can be also WSL-specific performance issues, e.g. #24839

This is WSL1 specific. Do we know if such issues can happen on WSL2 only? Wondering if we need the extra coverage if WSL2 behaves exactly the same as Debian/RedHat/CentOS/etc.

Do we know if such issues can happen on WSL2 only?

I think about all related to Console.

Another recent example of a WSL specific performance (concurrency related) issue that suggests test runs are needed: #42994

@dje-dev performance runs are tracked by issues in dotnet/performance. In that specific case, @adamsitnik it seems that we do have a test that sets/gets a thread static, but that scenario didn't not pop out for you in the WSL2 data submissions you analyzed (eg from me) right?

but that scenario didn't not pop out for you in the WSL2 data submissions you analyzed (eg from me) right

it did not, most probably because there was no regression compared to 3.1 (5.0 was as slow as 3.1)

I could install Ubuntu 18.04 WSL2 on my dual boot PC and compare bare-metal Ubuntu vs WSL2 Ubuntu using the same hardware. My only concern is how actionable would be such an analysis. So far we were trying to avoid WSL2-specific implementations on our side. I could identify WSL2 perf issues and report them as WSL2 product issues.

@danmosemsft would that be useful?

did not, most probably because there was no regression compared to 3.1 (5.0 was as slow as 3.1)

oh! of course.

I could install Ubuntu 18.04 WSL2 on my dual boot PC and compare bare-metal Ubuntu vs WSL2 Ubuntu

Without more customer reports, I don't think that's necessary.. Also it's not clear what priority we collectively have for fixing such things.

Due to lack of recent activity, this issue has been marked as a candidate for backlog cleanup. It will be closed if no further activity occurs within 14 more days. Any new comment (by anyone, not necessarily the author) will undo this process.

This process is part of our issue cleanup automation.

This issue will now be closed since it had been marked no-recent-activity but received no further activity in the past 14 days. It is still possible to reopen or comment on the issue, but please note that the issue will be locked if it remains inactive for another 30 days.