-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 323
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
Improvements that significantly reduce the chances of request timeouts #7042
Conversation
Request Timeouts started plaguing IDE due to numerous `executionContext/***Visualization` requests. While caused by a bug they revealed a bigger problem in the Language Server when serving large amounts of requests: 1) Long and short lived jobs are fighting for various locks. Lock contention leads to some jobs waiting for a long time until they can be executed. Increasing timeout wait is not a solution. 2) Requests coming from IDE are served almost instantly and handled by various commands. Commands can issue further jobs that serve the request. We apparently have and always had a single-thread thread pool for serving such jobs, leading to immediate thread starvation. Both reasons increase the chances of Request Timeouts. For 2) I noticed that while we used to set the `enso-runtime-server.jobParallelism` option descriptor key to some machine-dependent value (most likely > 1), the value set would only be available for instrumentation. `JobExecutionEngine` where it is actually used would always get the default, i.e. a single-threaded ThreadPool. Option descriptors were simply misused, since the option was introduced. Moved that option to runtime options so that it can be set and retrieved during normal operation. Adding parallelism intensified problem 1, because now we could execute multiple jobs and they would compete for resources. It also revealed a scenario for a yet another deadlock scenario, due to invalid order of lock acquisition. See `ExecuteJob` vs `UpsertVisualisationJob` order for details. Still, a number of requests would continue to randomly timeout due to lock contention. It became apparent that `Attach/Modify/Detach-VisualisationCmd` should not wait until a triggered `UpsertVisualisationJob` sends a response to the client; long and short lived jobs will always compete for resources and we cannot guarantee that they will not timeout that way. So a response is sent quicker from the command handler. This brings another problematic scenario: 1. `AttachVisualisationCmd` is executed, response sent to the client, `UpsertVisualisationJob` scheduled 2. In the meantime `ModifyVisualisationCmd` comes and fails because it cannot find the visualization that will only be added by `UpsertVisualisationJob` that hasn't yet been scheduled to run. Remedied that by checking visualisation-related jobs that are still in progress. It also allowed for cancelling jobs which results wouldn't be used anyway (`ModifyVisualisationCmd` sends its own `UpsertVisualisationJob`). This is not a theoretical scenario, it happened frequently due to IDE requests. This change does not fully solve the rather problematic setup of numerous locks, which are requested by short and long lived jobs. A better design should still be investigated. But it significantly reduces the chances of Request Timeouts which IDE had to deal with. I haven't been able to experience Request Timeouts for relatively modest projects anymore. I added the possibility of logging wait times for locks to better investigate further problems.
5c4f646
to
403824b
Compare
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.
Looks good
var n = getOption(RuntimeOptions.JOB_PARALLELISM_KEY); | ||
var base = n == null ? 1 : n.intValue(); | ||
var optimal = Math.round(base * 0.5); | ||
return optimal < 1 ? 1 : (int) optimal; |
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.
ok
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.
Yeah, I didn't really feel like doing something smarter here is necessary. We already have another thread pool for commands and akka/zio executors.
#7042) Request Timeouts started plaguing IDE due to numerous `executionContext/***Visualization` requests. While caused by a bug they revealed a bigger problem in the Language Server when serving large amounts of requests: 1) Long and short lived jobs are fighting for various locks. Lock contention leads to some jobs waiting for a longer than desired leading to unexpected request timeouts. Increasing timeout value is just delaying the problem. 2) Requests coming from IDE are served almost instantly and handled by various commands. Commands can issue further jobs that serve request. We apparently have and always had a single-thread thread pool for serving such jobs, leading to immediate thread starvation. Both reasons increase the chances of Request Timeouts when dealing with a large number of requests. For 2) I noticed that while we used to set the `enso-runtime-server.jobParallelism` option descriptor key to some machine-dependent value (most likely > 1), the value set would **only** be available for instrumentation. `JobExecutionEngine` where it is actually used would always get the default, i.e. a single-threaded ThreadPool. This means that this option descriptor was simply misused since its introduction. Moved that option to runtime options so that it can be set and retrieved during normal operation. Adding parallelism intensified problem 1), because now we could execute multiple jobs and they would compete for resources. It also revealed a scenario for a yet another deadlock scenario, due to invalid order of lock acquisition. See `ExecuteJob` vs `UpsertVisualisationJob` order for details. Still, a number of requests would continue to randomly timeout due to lock contention. It became apparent that `Attach/Modify/Detach-VisualisationCmd` should not wait until a triggered `UpsertVisualisationJob` sends a response to the client; long and short lived jobs will always compete for resources and we cannot guarantee that they will not timeout that way. That is why the response is sent immediately from the command handler and not from the job executed after it. This brings another problematic scenario: 1. `AttachVisualisationCmd` is executed, response sent to the client, `UpsertVisualisationJob` scheduled. 2. In the meantime `ModifyVisualisationCmd` comes and fails; command cannot find the visualization that will only be added by `UpsertVisualisationJob`, which might have not yet been scheduled to run. Remedied that by checking visualisation-related jobs that are still in progress. It also allowed for cancelling jobs which results wouldn't be used anyway (`ModifyVisualisationCmd` sends its own `UpsertVisualisationJob`). This is not a theoretical scenario, it happened frequently on IDE startup. This change does not fully solve the rather problematic setup of numerous locks, which are requested by short and long lived jobs. A better design should still be investigated. But it significantly reduces the chances of Request Timeouts which IDE had to deal with. With this change I haven't been able to experience Request Timeouts for relatively modest projects anymore. I added the possibility of logging wait times for locks to better investigate further problems. Closes #7005
Evaluating visualization expression may trigger a full compilation. A change in #7042 went a bit too far and led to a situation when there could be compilations running at the same time leading to a rather obscure `RedefinedMethodException` when the compilation on one thread already finished. This will make the logic correct again at the price of potentially slowing the processing of visualization.
Evaluating visualization expression may trigger a full compilation. A change in #7042 went a bit too far and led to a situation when there could be compilations running at the same time leading to a rather obscure `RedefinedMethodException` when the compilation on one thread already finished. This will make the logic correct again at the price of potentially slowing the processing of visualization. Closes #8296. # Important Notes Should make visualizations a bit more stable as well.
Pull Request Description
Request Timeouts started plaguing IDE due to numerous
executionContext/***Visualization
requests. While caused by a bug they revealed a bigger problem in the Language Server when serving large amounts of requests:Both reasons increase the chances of Request Timeouts when dealing with a large number of requests. For 2) I noticed that while we used to set the
enso-runtime-server.jobParallelism
option descriptor key to some machine-dependent value (most likely > 1), the value set would only be available for instrumentation.JobExecutionEngine
where it is actually used would always get the default, i.e. a single-threaded ThreadPool. This means that this option descriptor was simply misused since its introduction. Moved that option to runtime options so that it can be set and retrieved during normal operation.Adding parallelism intensified problem 1), because now we could execute multiple jobs and they would compete for resources. It also revealed a scenario for a yet another deadlock scenario, due to invalid order of lock acquisition. See
ExecuteJob
vsUpsertVisualisationJob
order for details.Still, a number of requests would continue to randomly timeout due to lock contention. It became apparent that
Attach/Modify/Detach-VisualisationCmd
should not wait until a triggeredUpsertVisualisationJob
sends a response to the client; long and short lived jobs will always compete for resources and we cannot guarantee that they will not timeout that way. That is why the response is sent immediately from the command handler and not from the job executed after it.This brings another problematic scenario:
AttachVisualisationCmd
is executed, response sent to the client,UpsertVisualisationJob
scheduled.ModifyVisualisationCmd
comes and fails; command cannot find the visualization that will only be added byUpsertVisualisationJob
, which might have not yet been scheduled to run.Remedied that by checking visualisation-related jobs that are still in progress. It also allowed for cancelling jobs which results wouldn't be used anyway (
ModifyVisualisationCmd
sends its ownUpsertVisualisationJob
). This is not a theoretical scenario, it happened frequently on IDE startup.This change does not fully solve the rather problematic setup of numerous locks, which are requested by short and long lived jobs. A better design should still be investigated. But it significantly reduces the chances of Request Timeouts which IDE had to deal with.
With this change I haven't been able to experience Request Timeouts for relatively modest projects anymore.
I added the possibility of logging wait times for locks to better investigate further problems.
Closes #7005
Checklist
Please ensure that the following checklist has been satisfied before submitting the PR:
Scala,
Java,
and
Rust
style guides. In case you are using a language not listed above, follow the Rust style guide.
./run ide build
.