-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 20.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
trie: parallelize committer #30461
Closed
+170
−58
Closed
trie: parallelize committer #30461
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The whole concept of wrapping nodes -- I don't see the point in it. Why is that needed? Couldn't you just copy the path for each goroutine, and then let each goroutine work on it's own path-copy individually without risking any cross-goroutine disruptions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Because multiple goroutines calling
AddNode
will cause concurrent map writes.This could be solved by using mutex, but using wrapping nodes to avoid lock/unlock can save a little more time.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well, if we're parallelizing things, you could have a
chan
where you send off the nodes, and then have a dedicated goroutine which just reads the chan and invokesAddNode
sequentially. If you make the chan use some buffering, then it should be faster than using a lock.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes I did try this approach before. However, it still requires a new struct, similar to
WrapNode
, to initialize thechan
sinceAddNode
requires both the node itself and the path. Additionally, we would need an extra mechanism to monitor when the send operation is completed. Here's the old draft PR illustrating this approach, rough version.For the idea of parallelizing committer and invoking
AddNode
sequentially, current PR can also achieve in a cleaner way, meanwhile just as fast. I believe both approaches are valid and can work well, and I'm open to further discussion if you think there's a strong case for the alternative.