Skip to content
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

hack/high_cpu_usage #176

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

hack/high_cpu_usage #176

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

JarbasAl
Copy link
Member

@JarbasAl JarbasAl commented Jan 18, 2024

maybe closes #151

@JarbasAl JarbasAl added the bug Something isn't working label Jan 18, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 18, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

❗ No coverage uploaded for pull request base (dev@1f5fa54). Click here to learn what that means.

Additional details and impacted files
@@          Coverage Diff           @@
##             dev     #176   +/-   ##
======================================
  Coverage       ?   54.20%           
======================================
  Files          ?       36           
  Lines          ?     3699           
  Branches       ?        0           
======================================
  Hits           ?     2005           
  Misses         ?     1694           
  Partials       ?        0           

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Copy link
Contributor

@mikejgray mikejgray left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Worth a try...can we have goldy test it on this branch before we merge it into dev? I'm concerned about far-reaching implications of always delaying it

@JarbasAl
Copy link
Member Author

can also put it behind a flag that only docker container sets, instead of being a default, but lets see what @goldyfruit tests have to say

@j1nx
Copy link
Member

j1nx commented Jan 18, 2024

Is this really tackling the problem?

I believe what @goldyfruit meant is that he uses multiple docker comtainers of which each container only runs one skill. The containers all run isolated, so each container only runs through this section once isn't it?

The problem, I believe comes from that when he boots, all those different containers are all started at once, so for the OS is looks similar as starting ovos-core multiple times at once, each of them loading one skill but any thread safe code within the conatiners doesn't know about threads in other containers. (? Assumption ?)

Not sure, you can fix this at the workshop level. Guess this needs to be solved on the OS level.

Or Python should be aware on a OS level of other python processes and the amount of threads.
Perhaps something like this;
https://docs.python.org/2/library/queue.html

But all that is out of my know how.

@goldyfruit
Copy link
Member

It helps a bit but more skill container I will have more the load will be.

image

@goldyfruit
Copy link
Member

Just retrieved without this PR and it seems better... Not sure why...

image

@JarbasAl JarbasAl marked this pull request as draft March 19, 2024 16:49
@JarbasAl JarbasAl closed this Mar 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

High CPU consumption of ovos-skill-launcher when ovos-core restarts
4 participants