-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 176
improve composable-cache performance #1004
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
anonrig
wants to merge
2
commits into
opennextjs:main
Choose a base branch
from
anonrig:yagiz/improve-composable-cache
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and old review comments may become outdated.
+101
−61
Open
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
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
Some comments aren't visible on the classic Files Changed page.
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
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,5 @@ | ||
--- | ||
"@opennextjs/aws": patch | ||
--- | ||
|
||
Improve composable-cache performance by avoiding unnecessary copies |
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
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
Oops, something went wrong.
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.
Wouldn't this cause an issue if we read this more than once in the get ? We then have a single ReadableStream that multiple reader would try to access.
We could teed on get as well, but it means we'd end up with a copy in memory and multiple ReadableStream, not sure if it's worth it or not ?
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.
well, the goal is to avoid having unnecessary memory allocations. Both optimizations have quirks, but right now, concurrent calls get stalled and have more impact due to this unnecessary copy. i'm open to suggestions.
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.
Might take a bit of experimentation to get exactly right. I'm also not convinced that this new bit is correct either. Another potential approach you could take would be to use a
Blob
to buffer the data and use it's.stream()
method to get individualReadableStream
instances that read from the single in memory buffer. That way you're not relying on, or victim to,ReadableStream
tees terrible default backpressure management that ends up creating multiple buffers in memory. But it's going to take a bit of careful thought to get right.Regardless, I think this is going to require some careful consideration to get correct. @anonrig is absolutely correct that the current code is needlessly bottlenecking with too many additional copies.
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've taken another shot and stored a blob on the composable cache rather than text or stream. So that, any caller can create a readable stream from the blob with almost no cost.