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