Remove background thread #98
Merged
Conversation
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
|
I did have a go testing a Rest API + IOC (mutli transport FastCS device) in a multi-threaded implementation (https://github.com/DiamondLightSource/FastCS/tree/multi-trans-threaded) vs a single event loop - against a serial device with a single client: Single eventloop: Multithreaded: I ran the tests a few times and they are consistent, on my machine. It seems that the multithreaded approach does add significant tail latency to "ca clients" which supports the approach in this PR Also, I found no significant difference for a single client when adding additional transports |
|
I haven't looked at the changes yet, but nice work with the benchmarking, that is really useful. |
Still needs some work. Im not sure I see this as becoming part of the test suite but it might be useful in dev or to track drift |
Merged
marcelldls
force-pushed
the
remove-bg-thread
branch
from
44b5eb5 to
0a43cfd
Compare
marcelldls
force-pushed
the
remove-bg-thread
branch
from
4cee203 to
f005662
Compare
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #98 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 88.08% 87.77% -0.32%
==========================================
Files 31 31
Lines 1309 1341 +32
==========================================
+ Hits 1153 1177 +24
- Misses 156 164 +8 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
marcelldls
force-pushed
the
remove-bg-thread
branch
from
f005662 to
2277ce6
Compare
|
Here are the latest benchmarks (running EPICS + REST + Tango together): I believe Tango suffers under loading since we are having to run it in a separate thread as it wont take a running event loop |
|
@GDYendell ready |
|
@marcelldls there is a conflict after the other merges. |
GDYendell
reviewed
Jan 22, 2025
marcelldls
force-pushed
the
remove-bg-thread
branch
from
1e36990 to
b901305
Compare
|
@GDYendell Looking a bit neater now? |
GDYendell
approved these changes
Jan 24, 2025
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Currently the
backendcreates a background thread andrun_coroutine_threadsafeis used as the mechanism to schedule work in this background eventloop.Moving to a single eventloop has the following benefits:
An error occurred: <asyncio.locks.Lock object at 0x7fa65fa5e450 [locked]> is bound to a different event loopwhich can occur on put requeststransportssimultanously from a single threadtransportsTo solve:
@GDYendell Creating a draft in-case this needs to be picked up but also for some thoughts?