-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Parallel download #85
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
Open
mgeplf
wants to merge
4
commits into
main
Choose a base branch
from
parallel-download
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
96de814
teach download_directory to use threads
mgeplf f3fcc42
only format/lint src, tests, examples,
mgeplf 2552a23
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/main' into parallel-download
mgeplf 70db5e4
make sure max_concurrent==1 does not use any threading
mgeplf 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 hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Should we make it serial by default to avoid surprises?
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.
I was thinking of having
max_concurrent
not use threads at all, in case it becomes a problem, but I don't forsee it being one (famous last words.)I think doing it in parallel by default is worthwhile, personally.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Just to be aware, if we integrate this in a service using fastapi (obi-one), and we have N concurrent requests served by sync endpoints, then we'll create up to
N*max_concurrent
additional threads (besides the N needed by the fastapi pool, 40 by default according to https://www.starlette.io/threadpool/).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.
do you think that's a problem?
obi-one can limit the max_concurrent, if it wants
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, but bringing a service to a halt/crash in order to realize that max_concurrent has to be lowered in download_directory is not great, is it?
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.
I would be surprised if threads doing downloads is what pushes it over the edge; assuming all 40 threads are spawning another 4, that's a limit of 160 - which is high, but not unheard of.