[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Performance on NFS
From: |
Ludovic Courtès |
Subject: |
Re: Performance on NFS |
Date: |
Mon, 12 Jun 2017 17:58:46 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2 (gnu/linux) |
Hi!
Roel Janssen <address@hidden> skribis:
> From these timings, I don't think it has a big impact.
Wait, wait. If we take the best timings of each series of runs, we get:
hpc-submit1: 26.4s -> 18.0s (-30%)
hpc-guix: 26.2s -> 22.7s (-13%)
This is arguably insufficient but still non-negligible. I’ve committed
it as b46712159c15f72fc28b71d17d5a7c74fcb64ed0.
With commit 015f17e8b9eff97f656852180ac51c75438d7f9d, the number of
open(2) calls for that same command drops from 991 to 795 (including 122
errors). I suspect we can’t reduce it further:
--8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8---
$ ./pre-inst-env strace -o ,,s guix build coreutils -n
$ grep '^open.*' < ,,s |wc -l
795
$ grep '^open.*\.go"' < ,,s |wc -l
563
$ grep '^open.*\.patch"' < ,,s |wc -l
29
$ grep '^open.*\.scm"' < ,,s |wc -l
6
--8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8---
Could you check how this affects performance on your NFS system?
There’s possibly another low-hanging fruit, which is to disable file
name canonicalization (via ‘%file-port-name-canonicalization’.) It
special care though, so I’ll try that later.
> This makes me wonder, can't we replace the disk-intensive stuff with a
> database? If we only have to read the files on disk once, after which
> we extracted the information (the hashes?) needed to compute which
> links have to be created to make an environment, then actually
> creating the environment can be as fast as only creating those links.
Essentially we need to compute derivations as a function of local files
(sent to the daemon with ‘add-to-store’) and other derivations. We
cannot avoid that.
In the case of a remote server, communications with the daemon play an
important role too. Have you tried setting ‘GUIX_DAEMON_SOCKET’ as
suggested before instead of using the “socat hack”? I think this should
be faster (see commit 950d51c9d9a5107c5dac279da7d2e431134b5f43.)
HTH,
Ludo’.
- Re: Combining Guix, direnv and Emacs for environment customisation, Roel Janssen, 2017/06/01
- Re: Combining Guix, direnv and Emacs for environment customisation, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/03
- Re: Combining Guix, direnv and Emacs for environment customisation, Roel Janssen, 2017/06/03
- Re: Combining Guix, direnv and Emacs for environment customisation, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/04
- Re: Combining Guix, direnv and Emacs for environment customisation, Roel Janssen, 2017/06/05
- Performance on NFS, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/07
- Re: Performance on NFS, Roel Janssen, 2017/06/07
- Re: Performance on NFS, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/09
- Re: Performance on NFS, Roel Janssen, 2017/06/12
- Re: Performance on NFS,
Ludovic Courtès <=
- Performance on NFS, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/16
- Re: Performance on NFS, Roel Janssen, 2017/06/17
- Re: Performance on NFS, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/17
- Re: Performance on NFS, Roel Janssen, 2017/06/17
- Re: Performance on NFS, Ricardo Wurmus, 2017/06/18
- RPC performance, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/19
- Re: RPC performance, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/19
- Re: RPC performance, Ricardo Wurmus, 2017/06/19
- Re: RPC performance, Andy Wingo, 2017/06/22
- Re: RPC performance, Ludovic Courtès, 2017/06/22