From: Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches <tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org>
To: Oleg Babin <olegrok@tarantool.org>,
tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org, sergepetrenko@tarantool.org
Subject: Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/1] json: use cord_ibuf for encoding and decoding
Date: Mon, 24 May 2021 17:49:45 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <06d4c252-3f41-d91b-6943-ec4cca520a99@tarantool.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <6e775936-55ac-066e-c68f-743890f49a07@tarantool.org>
Hi! Thanks for the review!
On 24.05.2021 12:04, Oleg Babin wrote:
> Hi! Thanks for your patch.
>
>
> I see strange effect. After a patch following script:
>
> ```
>
> for i = 1, 1e9 do pcall(json.encode, function() end) end
>
> ```
>
> produces quite strange effects with memory. After some time
>
> my system kills a process - also I see in htop that process consumes about 20% of memory.
>
> In contrast before the patch process uses 0.1% of memory and doesn't have any oscillations
>
> in "VIRT" and "RES" columns. Yes, it's a negative case but I believe such behaviour shouldn't be affected as well.
This is happening because you didn't do any yields. Cord buffer is freed
automatically when a yield happens. This is a workaround for not being
able to use a global buffer, which wouldn't need freeing at all.
This is a known issue with the cord buffer, and the only working alternative
I see is to wrap all related Lua C calls into lua_pcall(). This leads to
perf issues for the success case, because pcall does more work; because
you usually need to re-push the arguments; and because pcall is not jitted
AFAIK. For instance about arguments re-push, to use lua_pcall() in lua_cjson
in json_encode() I would need to push the Lua json.encode(...) arguments on
the stack again.
I couldn't find any good solution for the error-case so far. The same issue
exists now with all the code which used IBUF_SHARED/tarantool_ibuf and now
uses cord_ibuf_take()/put(). It does not justify the problem though.
I was thinking about using pcall anyway; about pushing a GC function on Lua
stack to free the cord buffer; about having a global buffer for normal context
and another global buffer per each level of GC recursion. The last idea is
not possible to implement due to lack of a concept of GC level in our Lua
implementation. The other ideas are going to hit the perf for the success
case. All looks bad.
Your particular example started working when I added a yield every 10k
encodes.
>> diff --git a/third_party/lua-cjson/lua_cjson.c b/third_party/lua-cjson/lua_cjson.c
>> index 38e999870..85186d6d5 100644
>> --- a/third_party/lua-cjson/lua_cjson.c
>> +++ b/third_party/lua-cjson/lua_cjson.c
>> @@ -182,9 +177,6 @@ static int json_destroy_config(lua_State *l)
>> static void json_create_tokens()
>> {
>> int i;
>> -#if DEFAULT_ENCODE_KEEP_BUFFER > 0
>> - strbuf_init(&encode_buf, 0);
>> -#endif
>> /* Decoding init */
>> @@ -444,7 +436,9 @@ static int json_encode(lua_State *l) {
>> "expected 1 or 2 arguments");
>> /* Reuse existing buffer. */
>> - strbuf_reset(&encode_buf);
>> + strbuf_t encode_buf;
>> + struct ibuf *ibuf = cord_ibuf_take();
>> + strbuf_create(&encode_buf, -1, ibuf);
>
> Maybe it's better to use "0" here. I know it has the same effect but usually 0 is default value. But up to you.
0 looks like "do not pre-allocate anything". I used the default value
explicitly now:
====================
@@ -438,7 +438,7 @@ static int json_encode(lua_State *l) {
/* Reuse existing buffer. */
strbuf_t encode_buf;
struct ibuf *ibuf = cord_ibuf_take();
- strbuf_create(&encode_buf, -1, ibuf);
+ strbuf_create(&encode_buf, STRBUF_DEFAULT_SIZE, ibuf);
struct luaL_serializer *cfg = luaL_checkserializer(l);
if (lua_gettop(l) == 2) {
====================
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2021-05-24 15:49 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2021-05-23 14:06 Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-05-24 10:04 ` Oleg Babin via Tarantool-patches
2021-05-24 15:49 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches [this message]
2021-05-24 16:00 ` Oleg Babin via Tarantool-patches
2021-05-24 13:01 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-05-24 13:05 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-05-24 15:47 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-05-24 15:47 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
2021-05-24 16:17 ` Serge Petrenko via Tarantool-patches
2021-05-25 21:20 ` Vladislav Shpilevoy via Tarantool-patches
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=06d4c252-3f41-d91b-6943-ec4cca520a99@tarantool.org \
--to=tarantool-patches@dev.tarantool.org \
--cc=olegrok@tarantool.org \
--cc=sergepetrenko@tarantool.org \
--cc=v.shpilevoy@tarantool.org \
--subject='Re: [Tarantool-patches] [PATCH 1/1] json: use cord_ibuf for encoding and decoding' \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox