[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Processing large amounts of files
From: |
Ricardo Wurmus |
Subject: |
Re: Processing large amounts of files |
Date: |
Thu, 21 Mar 2024 15:34:02 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.10.8; emacs 29.1 |
Hi Liliana,
[-guix-devel@gnu.org, +gwl-devel@gnu.org]
(forgot to actually send this message a few days ago)
thanks for the report!
> I have a somewhat unusual workflow that requires me to do a number of
> processes on numerous, but small input files. The original is a bit
> unwieldy and takes several minutes to compile, but I've managed to
> produce a more understandable and better performing example. Note,
> that after a certain number of inputs, I get the following error:
>
> info: .16 Loading workflow file `meow.gwl'...
> info: 2.80 Computing workflow `cat'...
> run: 12.96 Executing: /bin/sh -c
> /gnu/store/kmssbjcdcabg9fh4nxscwwpnlb4px30h-gwl-meow.scm …
> error: 13.01 Wrong type argument in position 1: #f
It is frustrating that there is no backtrace. Reliable error handling
is hard.
When running with "-l all" I see this:
info: .75 Computing workflow `cat'...
debug: 3.13 Computing script for process `meow'
guix: 3.13 Looking up package `bash-minimal'
guix: 3.13 Opening inferior Guix at
`/gnu/store/pb1nkrn3sg6a1j6c4r5j2ahygkf4vkv9-profile'
guix: 4.27 Looking up package `guix'
debug: 4.45 Generating all scripts and their dependencies.
debug: 4.89 Generating all scripts and their dependencies.
run: 6.73 Executing: /bin/sh -c
/gnu/store/5idhbvhrwj3p53kkz2vikdn1ypncwj84-gwl-meow.scm '((inputs
"/tmp/meow/0" ...
process: 8.80 In execvp of /bin/sh: Argument list too long
error: 8.80 Wrong type argument in position 1: #f
This at least tells us that the last error here is due to sh refusing to run.
> For comparison:
> time cat /tmp/meow/{0..7769}
> […]
>
> real 0m0,144s
> user 0m0,049s
> sys 0m0,094s
>
> It takes GWL 6 times longer to compute the workflow than to create the
> inputs in Guile, and 600 times longer than to actually execute the
> shell command. I think there is room for improvement :)
Yeah, not good. Do you have any recommendations?
--
Ricardo