[aglinxinyuan]

What changes were proposed in this PR?

Backport of #9096 to release/v1.3. It raises the merge queue's check_response_timeout_minutes in .asf.yaml from 45 to 360, so release/v1.3's copy matches main.

#9100 was also meant to come along, but it is already on release/v1.3 as #9132, with the same patch-id. So this PR carries only #9096. #9096 never got a release/v1.3 label because the backport auto-labeler skips fix(ci) PRs.

No live setting changes. ASF applies the github: block of .asf.yaml only from the default branch (asfyaml/feature/github/__init__.py returns early for any other branch). main's Merge Queue ruleset, which already lists refs/heads/release/v1.3, has used 360 since #9096. This backport only stops the release branch's copy from showing a stale 45.

Only that one line changes. The other differences between the two copies are left as they are: the include list here has no release/v1.3, and the Backport Approvals ruleset is missing.

Any related issues, documentation, discussions?

Backport of #9096. Related: #9095, INFRA-28569.

How was this PR tested?

git cherry-pick -x 2407d79ee7 applies cleanly onto release/v1.3. The diff is the single check_response_timeout_minutes line. The file still parses, and the Merge Queue rule reads 360:

python3 -I -c "import sys,yaml; d=yaml.safe_load(open(sys.argv[1])); rs=[r for r in d['github']['rulesets'] if r['name']=='Merge Queue'][0]; print([x['parameters']['check_response_timeout_minutes'] for x in rs['rules'] if x['type']=='merge_queue'])" .asf.yaml
[360]

Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?

Generated-by: Claude Code (Claude Opus 5.5)

[Copilot]

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has insufficient remaining quota.

[github-actions]

Automated Reviewer Suggestions

Based on the git blame history of the changed files, we recommend the following reviewers:

• Contributors with relevant context: @Yicong-Huang
  You can notify them by mentioning @Yicong-Huang in a comment.

[github-actions]

⚠️ Benchmark changes need a look

🟢 2 better · 🔴 4 worse · ⚪ 9 noise (<±5%) · 0 without baseline

Compared against main 10827b7 benchmarked on this same runner, so the delta is largely free of cross-runner hardware noise. The "7d avg" column still reflects the gh-pages dashboard. Treat <±5% as noise unless repeated.

Dashboard · Run

	config	throughput	MB/s	latency	max Δ latest / 7d
🔴	bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	419	0.256	22,833/33,689/33,689 us	🔴 +7.6% / 🔴 +175.6%
🟢	bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	956	0.583	103,950/120,547/120,547 us	🟢 -25.6% / 🔴 +38.3%
⚪	bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	1,132	0.691	884,215/997,712/997,712 us	⚪ within ±5% / 🔴 +22.0%

Baseline details

Latest main 10827b7 from same runner

config	metric	PR	latest main	7d avg	Δ latest	Δ 7d
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	419 tuples/sec	451 tuples/sec	1,019 tuples/sec	-7.1%	-58.9%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.256 MB/s	0.275 MB/s	0.622 MB/s	-6.9%	-58.8%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p50	22,833 us	22,342 us	10,144 us	+2.2%	+125.1%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p95	33,689 us	31,320 us	12,225 us	+7.6%	+175.6%
bs=10 sw=10 sl=64	p99	33,689 us	31,320 us	15,527 us	+7.6%	+117.0%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	956 tuples/sec	937 tuples/sec	1,371 tuples/sec	+2.0%	-30.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.583 MB/s	0.572 MB/s	0.837 MB/s	+1.9%	-30.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p50	103,950 us	102,292 us	79,910 us	+1.6%	+30.1%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p95	120,547 us	162,097 us	87,155 us	-25.6%	+38.3%
bs=100 sw=10 sl=64	p99	120,547 us	162,097 us	106,643 us	-25.6%	+13.0%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	throughput	1,132 tuples/sec	1,132 tuples/sec	1,415 tuples/sec	0.0%	-20.0%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	MB/s	0.691 MB/s	0.691 MB/s	0.864 MB/s	0.0%	-20.0%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p50	884,215 us	881,204 us	780,407 us	+0.3%	+13.3%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p95	997,712 us	970,029 us	817,814 us	+2.9%	+22.0%
bs=1000 sw=10 sl=64	p99	997,712 us	970,029 us	848,683 us	+2.9%	+17.6%

Raw CSV

config_idx,batch_size,schema_width,string_len,num_batches,total_ms,total_tuples,total_bytes,tuples_per_sec,mb_per_sec,lat_p50_us,lat_p95_us,lat_p99_us
0,10,10,64,20,477.45,200,128000,419,0.256,22833.01,33688.75,33688.75
1,100,10,64,20,2092.93,2000,1280000,956,0.583,103949.65,120547.24,120547.24
2,1000,10,64,20,17673.32,20000,12800000,1132,0.691,884214.87,997711.55,997711.55

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 94.10%. Comparing base (10827b7) to head (b79bb50).

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff               @@
##             release/v1.3    #9161   +/-   ##
===============================================
  Coverage           94.10%   94.10%           
- Complexity           4809     4810    +1     
===============================================
  Files                1194     1194           
  Lines               48625    48625           
  Branches             5864     5864           
===============================================
  Hits                45760    45760           
  Misses               1411     1411           
  Partials             1454     1454           

Flag	Coverage Δ
access-control-service	81.00% <ø> (ø)
agent-service	99.32% <ø> (ø)
amber	90.11% <ø> (ø)
computing-unit-managing-service	73.67% <ø> (ø)
config-service	87.00% <ø> (ø)
file-service	87.75% <ø> (ø)
frontend	96.89% <ø> (ø)
notebook-migration-service	79.31% <ø> (ø)
pyamber	98.18% <ø> (ø)
workflow-compiling-service	77.19% <ø> (ø)

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.