Optimize security protocol reflection performance

[vio-lin]

What is the purpose of the change?

#14937

Checklist

• Make sure there is a GitHub_issue field for the change.
• Write a pull request description that is detailed enough to understand what the pull request does, how, and why.
• Write necessary unit-test to verify your logic correction. If the new feature or significant change is committed, please remember to add sample in dubbo samples project.
• Make sure gitHub actions can pass. Why the workflow is failing and how to fix it?

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 90.47619% with 2 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 60.91%. Comparing base (6939e3c) to head (0b3c355).
Report is 1 commits behind head on 3.3.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
.../java/org/apache/dubbo/config/ReferenceConfig.java	90.47%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##                3.3   #15444      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     60.92%   60.91%   -0.01%     
- Complexity    11432    11435       +3     
============================================
  Files          1887     1887              
  Lines         86266    86277      +11     
  Branches      12929    12929              
============================================
  Hits          52559    52559              
- Misses        28269    28284      +15     
+ Partials       5438     5434       -4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
integration-tests-java17	33.09% <90.47%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
integration-tests-java8	33.13% <90.47%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
samples-tests-java17	31.46% <90.47%> (+0.01%)	⬆️
samples-tests-java8	29.27% <90.47%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️
unit-tests	58.84% <90.47%> (-0.02%)	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[zrlw]

in your machine it take how many times to process SerializeSecurityConfigurator addition with this pr? what's the different of cpu profile between the pr and original codes?
could you provide samples to https://github.com/apache/dubbo-samples or https://github.com/apache/dubbo-integration-cases/

[vio-lin]

in your machine it take how many times to process SerializeSecurityConfigurator addition with this pr? what's the different of cpu profile between the pr and original codes? could you provide samples to https://github.com/apache/dubbo-samples or https://github.com/apache/dubbo-integration-cases/

https://github.com/vio-lin/dubbo-samples/tree/test-security-protocol

dubbo-samples\2-advanced\dubbo-samples-async\dubbo-samples-async-simple-boot

step:

1. start org.apache.dubbo.async.boot.provider.ProviderApplication2
2. start org.apache.dubbo.async.boot.provider.ProviderApplication
3. start org.apache.dubbo.async.boot.consumer.ConsumerApplication

With this pr SerializeSecurityConfigurator addition only process when client init。

case	providers	times(pre)	thisPr	description
case1	1 provider	3	1	1 from RegisterProtocolWrapper,one from ServiceDiscoveryRegistryDirectory, one for RegistryDirectory
case2	2 provider	5	5	1 frorm RegisterProtocolWrapper, 2 from ServiceDiscoveryRegistryDirectory, 2 from RegistryDirectory
case4	2000 provider	4001	1	1 frorm RegisterProtocolWrapper, 2000 from ServiceDiscoveryRegistryDirectory, 2000 from RegistryDirectory

in server side times relay to protocols size it can not be very large.
in client size 2 * providerSize

the cpu profile , i use interface with 3 method and requesttype and response type with one layer inner class.
it may take 9 ms process in SerializeSecurityConfigurator addition my pc.
9ms pluse server size it may be problem in RegisterNotify.

[zrlw]

If it is necessary to add sample testing, you'd better add a separate test module instead of updating dubbo-samples-async-simple-boot, and submit a dubbo-samples pr for it.

[zrlw]

@AlbumenJ PTAL

[zrlw]

one reference.get() will call ProtocolSecurityWrapper#refer twice, first calling for the registry url like 'registry://xxx', second calling for the rpc url like 'tri://x.x.x.x/....', but only call ReferenceConfig#createProxy once.
this pr will cause registry url will not be processed.

[zrlw]

i think the simplest way might be:

1. move markedClass from method registerInterface into the fields of SerializeSecurityConfigurator for checking whether the interface has been checked or not, using HashSet is enough since registerInterface is synchronized method.
2. add such checking codes to the beginning of method registerInterface:

        if (!checkClass(clazz)) {
            return;
        } 

3. change the result type of checkClass method and remove markedClass from it's input params

private boolean checkClass(Class<?> clazz) {
        if (clazz == null) {
            return false;
        }

        if (!markedClass.add(clazz)) {
            return false;
        }
        // return true at follow codes.

[zrlw]

i think the simplest way might be:

1. move markedClass from method registerInterface into the fields of SerializeSecurityConfigurator for checking whether the interface has been checked or not, using HashSet is enough since registerInterface is synchronized method.
2. add such checking codes to the beginning of method registerInterface:

        if (!checkClass(clazz)) {
            return;
        } 

3. change the result type of checkClass method and remove markedClass from it's input params

private boolean checkClass(Class<?> clazz) {
        if (clazz == null) {
            return false;
        }

        if (!markedClass.add(clazz)) {
            return false;
        }
        // return true at follow codes.

@vio-lin would you like testing this plan and feedback what's the different?

[vio-lin]

i think the simplest way might be:

1. move markedClass from method registerInterface into the fields of SerializeSecurityConfigurator for checking whether the interface has been checked or not, using HashSet is enough since registerInterface is synchronized method.
2. add such checking codes to the beginning of method registerInterface:

        if (!checkClass(clazz)) {
            return;
        } 

3. change the result type of checkClass method and remove markedClass from it's input params

private boolean checkClass(Class<?> clazz) {
        if (clazz == null) {
            return false;
        }

        if (!markedClass.add(clazz)) {
            return false;
        }
        // return true at follow codes.

@vio-lin would you like testing this plan and feedback what's the different?

wait for moment.

[zrlw]

@vio-lin any progress?

[vio-lin]

@vio-lin any progress?

on vacation last week. 😀
test today.

it works well

i change my test case registry multi instance to local zookeeper.
and use ai to create some complext response type ( 300lins )

provider

    <dubbo:protocol name="dubbo" port="20880"/>

    <bean id="asyncService" class="org.apache.dubbo.async.boot.provider.HiServiceImpl"/>

    <dubbo:service interface="org.apache.dubbo.samples.async.boot.HiService" version="1.001" ref="asyncService"/>
    <dubbo:service interface="org.apache.dubbo.samples.async.boot.HiService" version="1.002" ref="asyncService"/>
    <dubbo:service interface="org.apache.dubbo.samples.async.boot.HiService" version="1.003" ref="asyncService"/>

consumer

public class Task implements CommandLineRunner {
    @DubboReference(async = true,version = "*")
    private HiService hiService;

add breakPoint in org.apache.dubbo.registry.integration.RegistryDirectory#toInvokers the method start and end.

there is result.

case	code	instance count	Time to process
1	code in dubbo	500instance	3091ms
2	code we changed	500instance	204ms
3	code in dubbo	1000instance	5166ms
4	code we change	1000instance	176ms

[zrlw]

@vio-lin any progress?

on vacation last week. 😀 test today.

it works well

if so, just optimize SerializeSecurityConfigurator like this #15500 ?

[vio-lin]

@vio-lin any progress?

on vacation last week. 😀 test today.
it works well

if so, just optimize SerializeSecurityConfigurator like this #15500 ?

look good to me。

[zrlw]

solved