Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Osztrogonác Csaba]

Apple dropped Windows WebKit2 port long long time ago:
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=105585 and as
far as I remember NetworkProcess didn't have Windows
support ever. So it isn't an easy task. Not at all.

br,
Ossy

On 2014-11-03 19:38, Brent Fulgham wrote:

I wonder if we could easily modify the Windows port to make use of a
Network process.

-Brent


On Nov 3, 2014, at 8:07 AM, Anders Carlsson mailto:ander...@apple.com>> wrote:



On Nov 3, 2014, at 12:22 AM, Benjamin Poulain mailto:benja...@webkit.org>> wrote:



I believe it would be better to enable the network process for all
process models. Maintaining multiple configurations for marginal
gains is not sustainable, especially in the network stack.


I agree 100%. Not to mention that we also want to get rid of the
“single web process” code path, and just make it a special case of
having multiple web processes with a maximum process cap of 1.

- Anders

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Benjamin Poulain]

On 11/3/14 11:12 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:

El lun, 03-11-2014 a las 00:22 -0800, Benjamin Poulain escribió:

On 11/2/14, 1:11 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:

El sáb, 01-11-2014 a las 20:43 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:

On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos
 wrote:
  El vie, 31-10-2014 a las 19:02 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:
  > Hello,
  >
  >
  > I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache
  implementation to
  > WebKit (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322).

  Great news!

  >  The main motivations are:
  >
  >
  > - Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For
  example we
  > can serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of
  converting
  > to/from platform types.
  > - Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer
  coordination
  > between cache and WebKit opens new optimization
  possibilities.
  >
  >
  > The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is
  > cross-platform. The storage backend uses libdispatch IO
  though it
  > wouldn't be hard to add a generic posix one too.

  Why is it limited to the network process? wouldn't it be
  possible to use
  it also in the web process when shared secondary process model
  is used?


The cache ties to NetworkResourceLoader which lives in the network
process. In principle it would be possible to integrate with the web
process side resource loader too. However I don't want to support
multiple configurations during development.


It would be good if all WK2 ports would eventually switch to using the
network process. The current multitude of configurations makes
networking related code more confusing and less hackable than it needs
to be.

The GTK+ port supports the network process, but it's only used when
multiple secondary process model is used. Some applications prefer the
single shared secondary process model, and even some of the browser
users change the default process model of epiphany to single web process
because it requires fewer resources. So, we could either integrate the
cache with the web process loader, or use the network process
unconditionally for all process models. I think for many simple
applications a single web process is the most efficient model, though.

I believe it would be better to enable the network process for all
process models. Maintaining multiple configurations for marginal gains
is not sustainable, especially in the network stack.

You say a single Web Process is the most efficient model for some
applications. What is the impact of always enabling the network process on:
-CPU load?
-Memory load?
-Overall performance?


I haven't measured, I was thinking mainly on the overhead of the IPC
traffic required for the network resources.


On iOS, we managed to optimize this until IPC was no longer a major 
performance concern. Our IPC should definitely improve but it is not a 
high priority for performance.


You could argue that iOS runs on very unconventional CPUs but we also 
have some old ARMv7 that are close to conventional CPU and we managed 
reasonable overhead on those too.


In my humble opinion, we should just get hard data and solve the actual 
problems (which I suspect may be memory and not IPC).


Benjamin


Once we know where the problems are, we should work together at reducing
the impact. I suspect we can get the network process below 5% overhead.

Benjamin
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev



___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev



___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Carlos Garcia Campos]

El lun, 03-11-2014 a las 00:22 -0800, Benjamin Poulain escribió:
> On 11/2/14, 1:11 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:
> > El sáb, 01-11-2014 a las 20:43 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:
> >> On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos
> >>  wrote:
> >>  El vie, 31-10-2014 a las 19:02 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:
> >>  > Hello,
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  > I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache
> >>  implementation to
> >>  > WebKit (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322).
> >>  
> >>  Great news!
> >>  
> >>  >  The main motivations are:
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  > - Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For
> >>  example we
> >>  > can serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of
> >>  converting
> >>  > to/from platform types.
> >>  > - Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer
> >>  coordination
> >>  > between cache and WebKit opens new optimization
> >>  possibilities.
> >>  >
> >>  >
> >>  > The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is
> >>  > cross-platform. The storage backend uses libdispatch IO
> >>  though it
> >>  > wouldn't be hard to add a generic posix one too.
> >>  
> >>  Why is it limited to the network process? wouldn't it be
> >>  possible to use
> >>  it also in the web process when shared secondary process model
> >>  is used?
> >>
> >>
> >> The cache ties to NetworkResourceLoader which lives in the network
> >> process. In principle it would be possible to integrate with the web
> >> process side resource loader too. However I don't want to support
> >> multiple configurations during development.
> >>
> >>
> >> It would be good if all WK2 ports would eventually switch to using the
> >> network process. The current multitude of configurations makes
> >> networking related code more confusing and less hackable than it needs
> >> to be.
> > The GTK+ port supports the network process, but it's only used when
> > multiple secondary process model is used. Some applications prefer the
> > single shared secondary process model, and even some of the browser
> > users change the default process model of epiphany to single web process
> > because it requires fewer resources. So, we could either integrate the
> > cache with the web process loader, or use the network process
> > unconditionally for all process models. I think for many simple
> > applications a single web process is the most efficient model, though.
> I believe it would be better to enable the network process for all 
> process models. Maintaining multiple configurations for marginal gains 
> is not sustainable, especially in the network stack.
> 
> You say a single Web Process is the most efficient model for some 
> applications. What is the impact of always enabling the network process on:
> -CPU load?
> -Memory load?
> -Overall performance?

I haven't measured, I was thinking mainly on the overhead of the IPC
traffic required for the network resources.

> Once we know where the problems are, we should work together at reducing 
> the impact. I suspect we can get the network process below 5% overhead.
> 
> Benjamin
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Brent Fulgham]

I wonder if we could easily modify the Windows port to make use of a Network 
process.

-Brent

> On Nov 3, 2014, at 8:07 AM, Anders Carlsson  > wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 3, 2014, at 12:22 AM, Benjamin Poulain > > wrote:
> 
>> I believe it would be better to enable the network process for all process 
>> models. Maintaining multiple configurations for marginal gains is not 
>> sustainable, especially in the network stack.
> 
> I agree 100%. Not to mention that we also want to get rid of the “single web 
> process” code path, and just make it a special case of having multiple web 
> processes with a maximum process cap of 1.
> 
> - Anders
> 
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org 
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Anders Carlsson]

> On Nov 3, 2014, at 12:22 AM, Benjamin Poulain  wrote:

> I believe it would be better to enable the network process for all process 
> models. Maintaining multiple configurations for marginal gains is not 
> sustainable, especially in the network stack.

I agree 100%. Not to mention that we also want to get rid of the “single web 
process” code path, and just make it a special case of having multiple web 
processes with a maximum process cap of 1.

- Anders

___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Benjamin Poulain]

On 11/2/14, 1:11 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos wrote:

El sáb, 01-11-2014 a las 20:43 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:

On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos
 wrote:
 El vie, 31-10-2014 a las 19:02 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:
 > Hello,
 >
 >
 > I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache
 implementation to
 > WebKit (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322).
 
 Great news!
 
 >  The main motivations are:

 >
 >
 > - Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For
 example we
 > can serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of
 converting
 > to/from platform types.
 > - Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer
 coordination
 > between cache and WebKit opens new optimization
 possibilities.
 >
 >
 > The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is
 > cross-platform. The storage backend uses libdispatch IO
 though it
 > wouldn't be hard to add a generic posix one too.
 
 Why is it limited to the network process? wouldn't it be

 possible to use
 it also in the web process when shared secondary process model
 is used?


The cache ties to NetworkResourceLoader which lives in the network
process. In principle it would be possible to integrate with the web
process side resource loader too. However I don't want to support
multiple configurations during development.


It would be good if all WK2 ports would eventually switch to using the
network process. The current multitude of configurations makes
networking related code more confusing and less hackable than it needs
to be.

The GTK+ port supports the network process, but it's only used when
multiple secondary process model is used. Some applications prefer the
single shared secondary process model, and even some of the browser
users change the default process model of epiphany to single web process
because it requires fewer resources. So, we could either integrate the
cache with the web process loader, or use the network process
unconditionally for all process models. I think for many simple
applications a single web process is the most efficient model, though.
I believe it would be better to enable the network process for all 
process models. Maintaining multiple configurations for marginal gains 
is not sustainable, especially in the network stack.


You say a single Web Process is the most efficient model for some 
applications. What is the impact of always enabling the network process on:

-CPU load?
-Memory load?
-Overall performance?

Once we know where the problems are, we should work together at reducing 
the impact. I suspect we can get the network process below 5% overhead.


Benjamin
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Carlos Garcia Campos]

El sáb, 01-11-2014 a las 20:43 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:
> On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos
>  wrote:
> El vie, 31-10-2014 a las 19:02 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> > I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache
> implementation to
> > WebKit (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322).
> 
> Great news!
> 
> >  The main motivations are:
> >
> >
> > - Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For
> example we
> > can serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of
> converting
> > to/from platform types.
> > - Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer
> coordination
> > between cache and WebKit opens new optimization
> possibilities.
> >
> >
> > The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is
> > cross-platform. The storage backend uses libdispatch IO
> though it
> > wouldn't be hard to add a generic posix one too.
> 
> Why is it limited to the network process? wouldn't it be
> possible to use
> it also in the web process when shared secondary process model
> is used?
> 
> 
> The cache ties to NetworkResourceLoader which lives in the network
> process. In principle it would be possible to integrate with the web
> process side resource loader too. However I don't want to support
> multiple configurations during development.
>
> 
> It would be good if all WK2 ports would eventually switch to using the
> network process. The current multitude of configurations makes
> networking related code more confusing and less hackable than it needs
> to be.

The GTK+ port supports the network process, but it's only used when
multiple secondary process model is used. Some applications prefer the
single shared secondary process model, and even some of the browser
users change the default process model of epiphany to single web process
because it requires fewer resources. So, we could either integrate the
cache with the web process loader, or use the network process
unconditionally for all process models. I think for many simple
applications a single web process is the most efficient model, though.

> 
> 
> 
>antti
>  
> 
> >
> > The code will be behind NETWORK_CACHE feature flag.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   antti
> > ___
> > webkit-dev mailing list
> > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
> 
> 
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
> 
> 
> 


___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Antti Koivisto]

On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 10:13 AM, Carlos Garcia Campos 
wrote:

> El vie, 31-10-2014 a las 19:02 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:
> > Hello,
> >
> >
> > I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache implementation to
> > WebKit (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322).
>
> Great news!
>
> >  The main motivations are:
> >
> >
> > - Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For example we
> > can serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of converting
> > to/from platform types.
> > - Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer coordination
> > between cache and WebKit opens new optimization possibilities.
> >
> >
> > The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is
> > cross-platform. The storage backend uses libdispatch IO though it
> > wouldn't be hard to add a generic posix one too.
>
> Why is it limited to the network process? wouldn't it be possible to use
> it also in the web process when shared secondary process model is used?
>

The cache ties to NetworkResourceLoader which lives in the network process.
In principle it would be possible to integrate with the web process side
resource loader too. However I don't want to support multiple
configurations during development.

It would be good if all WK2 ports would eventually switch to using the
network process. The current multitude of configurations makes networking
related code more confusing and less hackable than it needs to be.


   antti


>
> >
> > The code will be behind NETWORK_CACHE feature flag.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >   antti
> > ___
> > webkit-dev mailing list
> > webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> > https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>
>
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Antti Koivisto]

On Sat, Nov 1, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Alex Christensen <
alex.christen...@flexsim.com> wrote:

> Would anything special need to be done for Windows?
>

Is there some Windows port that uses network process? As I mentioned
enabling the feature would require Windows specific backend implementation.
Just compiling it out requires no action.


   antti


>
> Alex
>
> On Oct 31, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Antti Koivisto  wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache implementation to WebKit (
> https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322). The main motivations are:
>
> - Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For example we can
> serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of converting to/from
> platform types.
> - Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer coordination
> between cache and WebKit opens new optimization possibilities.
>
> The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is
> cross-platform. The storage backend uses libdispatch IO though it wouldn't
> be hard to add a generic posix one too.
>
> The code will be behind NETWORK_CACHE feature flag.
>
>
>   antti
>
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
>
>
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Carlos Garcia Campos]

El vie, 31-10-2014 a las 19:02 +0200, Antti Koivisto escribió:
> Hello,
> 
> 
> I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache implementation to
> WebKit (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322).

Great news!

>  The main motivations are:
> 
> 
> - Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For example we
> can serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of converting
> to/from platform types.
> - Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer coordination
> between cache and WebKit opens new optimization possibilities.
> 
> 
> The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is
> cross-platform. The storage backend uses libdispatch IO though it
> wouldn't be hard to add a generic posix one too.

Why is it limited to the network process? wouldn't it be possible to use
it also in the web process when shared secondary process model is used?

> 
> The code will be behind NETWORK_CACHE feature flag.
> 
> 
> 
> 
>   antti
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev


___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

Re: [webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Alex Christensen]

Would anything special need to be done for Windows?

Alex

> On Oct 31, 2014, at 11:02 AM, Antti Koivisto  wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache implementation to WebKit 
> (https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322). The main motivations are:
> 
> - Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For example we can 
> serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of converting to/from 
> platform types.
> - Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer coordination between 
> cache and WebKit opens new optimization possibilities.
> 
> The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is cross-platform. 
> The storage backend uses libdispatch IO though it wouldn't be hard to add a 
> generic posix one too.
> 
> The code will be behind NETWORK_CACHE feature flag.
> 
> 
>   antti
> ___
> webkit-dev mailing list
> webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
> https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev

[webkit-dev] Disk cache

[Antti Koivisto]

Hello,

I'm planning to add an experimental HTTP cache implementation to WebKit (
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=30322). The main motivations are:

- Improving performance by bringing the cache closer. For example we can
serialize WebKit response objects directly instead of converting to/from
platform types.
- Making future innovation around caching easier. Closer coordination
between cache and WebKit opens new optimization possibilities.

The cache lives in the network process. Most of the code is cross-platform.
The storage backend uses libdispatch IO though it wouldn't be hard to add a
generic posix one too.

The code will be behind NETWORK_CACHE feature flag.


  antti
___
webkit-dev mailing list
webkit-dev@lists.webkit.org
https://lists.webkit.org/mailman/listinfo/webkit-dev