https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/9925
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 10:24 AM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> wrote: > > I don't have the bandwidth right now to tackle this. Feel free to take it. > > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 10:16 AM Robert Bradshaw <rober...@google.com> wrote: >> >> The Python SDK does as well. These calls are coming from >> to_runner_api, is_stateful_dofn, and validate_stateful_dofn which are >> invoked once per pipene or bundle. They are, however, surprisingly >> expensive. Even memoizing across those three calls should save a >> significant amount of time. Udi, did you want to tackle this? >> >> Looking at the profile, Pipeline.to_runner_api() is being called 30 >> times in this test, and [Applied]PTransform.to_fn_api being called >> 3111 times, so that in itself might be interesting to investigate. >> >> On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 8:26 AM Robert Burke <rob...@frantil.com> wrote: >> > >> > As does the Go SDK. Invokers are memoized and when possible code is >> > generated to avoid reflection. >> > >> > On Tue, Oct 29, 2019, 6:46 AM Kenneth Knowles <k...@google.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> Noting for the benefit of the thread archive in case someone goes digging >> >> and wonders if this affects other SDKs: the Java SDK memoizes >> >> DoFnSignatures and generated DoFnInvoker classes. >> >> >> >> Kenn >> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 6:59 PM Udi Meiri <eh...@google.com> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> Re: #9283 slowing down tests, ideas for slowness: >> >>> 1. I added a lot of test cases, some with locally run pipelines. >> >>> 2. The PR somehow changed how coders are selected, and now we're using >> >>> less efficient ones. >> >>> 3. New dependency funcsigs is slowing things down? (py2 only) >> >>> >> >>> I ran "pytest -k PipelineAnalyzerTest --profile-svg" on 2.7 and 3.7 and >> >>> got these cool graphs (attached). >> >>> 2.7: core:294:get_function_arguments takes 56.66% of CPU time (IIUC), >> >>> gets called ~230k times >> >>> 3.7: core:294:get_function_arguments 30.88%, gets called ~200k times >> >>> >> >>> After memoization of get_function_args_defaults: >> >>> 2.7: core:294:get_function_arguments 20.02% >> >>> 3.7: core:294:get_function_arguments 8.11% >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 5:38 PM Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>> >> >>>> *not deciles, but 9-percentiles : ) >> >>>> >> >>>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 5:31 PM Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> >> >>>> wrote: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> I've ran the tests in Python 2 (without cython), and used a utility to >> >>>>> track runtime for each test method. I found some of the following >> >>>>> things: >> >>>>> - Total test methods run: 2665 >> >>>>> - Total test runtime: 990 seconds >> >>>>> - Deciles of time spent: >> >>>>> - 1949 tests run in the first 9% of time >> >>>>> - 173 in the 9-18% rang3e >> >>>>> - 130 in the 18-27% range >> >>>>> - 95 in the 27-36% range >> >>>>> - 77 >> >>>>> - 66 >> >>>>> - 55 >> >>>>> - 46 >> >>>>> - 37 >> >>>>> - 24 >> >>>>> - 13 tests run in the last 9% of time. This represents about 1 >> >>>>> minute and a half. >> >>>>> >> >>>>> We may be able to look at the slowest X tests, and get gradual >> >>>>> improvements from there. Although it seems .. not dramatic ones : ) >> >>>>> >> >>>>> FWIW I uploaded the results here: >> >>>>> https://storage.googleapis.com/apache-beam-website-pull-requests/python-tests/nosetimes.json >> >>>>> >> >>>>> The slowest 13 tests were: >> >>>>> >> >>>>> [('apache_beam.runners.interactive.pipeline_analyzer_test.PipelineAnalyzerTest.test_basic', >> >>>>> 5.253582000732422), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.runners.interactive.interactive_runner_test.InteractiveRunnerTest.test_wordcount', >> >>>>> 7.907713890075684), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.io.gcp.bigquery_test.PipelineBasedStreamingInsertTest.test_failure_has_same_insert_ids', >> >>>>> 5.237942934036255), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.transforms.combiners_test.CombineTest.test_global_sample', >> >>>>> 5.563946008682251), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.runners.worker.sideinputs_test.EmulatedCollectionsTest.test_large_iterable_values', >> >>>>> 5.680700063705444), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.io.parquetio_test.TestParquet.test_sink_transform_multiple_row_group', >> >>>>> 6.111238956451416), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.runners.worker.statesampler_test.StateSamplerTest.test_basic_sampler', >> >>>>> 6.007534980773926), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.runners.interactive.interactive_runner_test.InteractiveRunnerTest.test_basic', >> >>>>> 13.993916988372803), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.runners.interactive.pipeline_analyzer_test.PipelineAnalyzerTest.test_read_cache_expansion', >> >>>>> 6.3383049964904785), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.runners.interactive.pipeline_analyzer_test.PipelineAnalyzerTest.test_word_count', >> >>>>> 9.157485008239746), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.runners.portability.portable_runner_test.PortableRunnerTestWithSubprocesses.test_pardo_side_and_main_outputs', >> >>>>> 5.191173076629639), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.io.vcfio_test.VcfSourceTest.test_pipeline_read_file_pattern_large', >> >>>>> 6.2221620082855225), >> >>>>> >> >>>>> ('apache_beam.io.fileio_test.WriteFilesTest.test_streaming_complex_timing', >> >>>>> 7.7187910079956055)] >> >>>>> >> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 3:10 PM Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> >> >>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> I have written https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/9910 to reduce >> >>>>>> FnApiRunnerTest variations. >> >>>>>> I'm not in a rush to merge, but rather happy to start a discussion. >> >>>>>> I'll also try to figure out if there are other tests slowing down the >> >>>>>> suite significantly. >> >>>>>> Best >> >>>>>> -P. >> >>>>>> >> >>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 7:41 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev >> >>>>>> <valen...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Thanks, Brian. >> >>>>>>> +Udi Meiri >> >>>>>>> As next step, it would be good to know whether slowdown is caused by >> >>>>>>> tests in this PR, or its effect on other tests, and to confirm that >> >>>>>>> only Python 2 codepaths were affected. >> >>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 6:35 PM Brian Hulette <bhule...@google.com> >> >>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I did a bisect based on the runtime of `./gradlew >> >>>>>>>> :sdks:python:test-suites:tox:py2:testPy2Gcp` around the commits >> >>>>>>>> between 9/1 and 9/15 to see if I could find the source of the spike >> >>>>>>>> that happened around 9/6. It looks like it was due to PR#9283 [1]. >> >>>>>>>> I thought maybe this search would reveal some mis-guided >> >>>>>>>> configuration change, but as far as I can tell 9283 just added a >> >>>>>>>> well-tested feature. I don't think there's anything to learn from >> >>>>>>>> that... I just wanted to circle back about it in case others are >> >>>>>>>> curious about that spike. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> I'm +1 on bumping some FnApiRunner configurations. >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> Brian >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/9283 >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 4:49 PM Pablo Estrada <pabl...@google.com> >> >>>>>>>> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> I think it makes sense to remove some of the extra FnApiRunner >> >>>>>>>>> configurations. Perhaps some of the multiworkers and some of the >> >>>>>>>>> grpc versions? >> >>>>>>>>> Best >> >>>>>>>>> -P. >> >>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 12:27 PM Robert Bradshaw >> >>>>>>>>> <rober...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> It looks like fn_api_runner_test.py is quite expensive, taking >> >>>>>>>>>> 10-15+ >> >>>>>>>>>> minutes on each version of Python. This test consists of a base >> >>>>>>>>>> class >> >>>>>>>>>> that is basically a validates runner suite, and is then run in >> >>>>>>>>>> several >> >>>>>>>>>> configurations, many more of which (including some expensive ones) >> >>>>>>>>>> have been added lately. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> class FnApiRunnerTest(unittest.TestCase): >> >>>>>>>>>> class FnApiRunnerTestWithGrpc(FnApiRunnerTest): >> >>>>>>>>>> class FnApiRunnerTestWithGrpcMultiThreaded(FnApiRunnerTest): >> >>>>>>>>>> class FnApiRunnerTestWithDisabledCaching(FnApiRunnerTest): >> >>>>>>>>>> class FnApiRunnerTestWithMultiWorkers(FnApiRunnerTest): >> >>>>>>>>>> class FnApiRunnerTestWithGrpcAndMultiWorkers(FnApiRunnerTest): >> >>>>>>>>>> class FnApiRunnerTestWithBundleRepeat(FnApiRunnerTest): >> >>>>>>>>>> class >> >>>>>>>>>> FnApiRunnerTestWithBundleRepeatAndMultiWorkers(FnApiRunnerTest): >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> I'm not convinced we need to run all of these permutations, or at >> >>>>>>>>>> least not all tests in all permutations. >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Oct 25, 2019 at 10:57 AM Valentyn Tymofieiev >> >>>>>>>>>> <valen...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > I took another look at this and precommit ITs are already >> >>>>>>>>>> > running in parallel, albeit in the same suite. However it >> >>>>>>>>>> > appears Python precommits became slower, especially Python 2 >> >>>>>>>>>> > precommits [35 min per suite x 3 suites], see [1]. Not sure yet >> >>>>>>>>>> > what caused the increase, but precommits used to be faster. >> >>>>>>>>>> > Perhaps we have added a slow test or a lot of new tests. >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > [1] >> >>>>>>>>>> > https://scans.gradle.com/s/jvcw5fpqfc64k/timeline?task=ancsbov425524 >> >>>>>>>>>> > >> >>>>>>>>>> > On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 4:53 PM Ahmet Altay <al...@google.com> >> >>>>>>>>>> > wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> Ack. Separating precommit ITs to a different suite sounds >> >>>>>>>>>> >> good. Anyone is interested in doing that? >> >>>>>>>>>> >> >> >>>>>>>>>> >> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 2:41 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev >> >>>>>>>>>> >> <valen...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> This should not increase the queue time substantially, since >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> precommit ITs are running sequentially with precommit tests, >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> unlike multiple precommit tests which run in parallel to each >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> other. >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> The precommit ITs we run are batch and streaming wordcount >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> tests on Py2 and one Py3 version, so it's not a lot of tests. >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 1:07 PM Ahmet Altay >> >>>>>>>>>> >>> <al...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> +1 to separating ITs from precommit. Downside would be, when >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Chad tried to do something similar [1] it was noted that the >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> total time to run all precommit tests would increase and >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> also potentially increase the queue time. >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> Another alternative, we could run a smaller set of IT tests >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> in precommits and run the whole suite as part of post commit >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> tests. >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/9642 >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 12:15 PM Valentyn Tymofieiev >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>> <valen...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> One improvement could be move to Precommit IT tests into a >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> separate suite from precommit tests, and run it in parallel. >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 11:41 AM Brian Hulette >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>> <bhule...@google.com> wrote: >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Python Precommits are taking quite a while now [1]. Just >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> visually it looks like the average length is 1.5h or so, >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> but it spikes up to 2h. I've had several precommit runs >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> get aborted due to the 2 hour limit. >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> It looks like there was a spike up above 1h back on 9/6 >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> and the duration has been steadily rising since then. Is >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> there anything we can do about this? >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> Brian >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> [1] >> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>> http://104.154.241.245/d/_TNndF2iz/pre-commit-test-latency?orgId=1&from=now-90d&to=now&fullscreen&panelId=4
