X-Git-Url: http://git.vanrenterghem.biz/git.ikiwiki.info.git/blobdiff_plain/0c46805fa2f77fd1ae6d2b0df79e5bcb4bf08dce..486076c94367a40ff6a5e2476d98b87cd8d64f96:/doc/todo/multi-thread_ikiwiki.mdwn?ds=inline diff --git a/doc/todo/multi-thread_ikiwiki.mdwn b/doc/todo/multi-thread_ikiwiki.mdwn index 1494fed7a..358185a22 100644 --- a/doc/todo/multi-thread_ikiwiki.mdwn +++ b/doc/todo/multi-thread_ikiwiki.mdwn @@ -6,3 +6,84 @@ Lots of \[[!img ]] (~2200), lots of \[[!teximg ]] (~2700). A complete rebuild ta We could use a big machine, with plenty of CPUs. Could some multi-threading support be added to ikiwiki, by forking out all the external heavy plugins (imagemagick, tex, ...) and/or by processing pages in parallel? Disclaimer: I know nothing of the Perl approach to parallel processing. + +> I agree that it would be lovely to be able to use multiple processors to speed up rebuilds on big sites (I have a big site myself), but, taking a quick look at what Perl threads entails, and taking into acount what I've seen of the code of IkiWiki, it would take a massive rewrite to make IkiWiki thread-safe - the API would have to be completely rewritten - and then more work again to introduce threading itself. So my unofficial humble opinion is that it's unlikely to be done. +> Which is a pity, and I hope I'm mistaken about it. +> --[[KathrynAndersen]] + +> > I have much less experience with the internals of Ikiwiki, much +> > less Multi-threading perl, but I agree that to make Ikiwiki thread +> > safe and to make the modifications to really take advantage of the +> > threads is probably beyond the realm of reasonable +> > expectations. Having said that, I wonder if there aren't ways to +> > make Ikiwiki perform better for these big cases where the only +> > option is to wait for it to grind through everything. Something +> > along the lines of doing all of the aggregation and dependency +> > heavy stuff early on, and then doing all of the page rendering +> > stuff at the end quasi-asynchronously? Or am I way off in the deep +> > end. +> > +> > From a practical perspective, it seems like these massive rebuild +> > situations represent a really small subset of ikiwiki builds. Most +> > sites are pretty small, and most sites need full rebuilds very +> > very infrequently. In that scope, 10 minute rebuilds aren't that +> > bad seeming. In terms of performance challenges, it's the one page +> > with 3-5 dependency that takes 10 seconds (say) to rebuild that's +> > a larger challenge for Ikiwiki as a whole. At the same time, I'd +> > be willing to bet that performance benefits for these really big +> > repositories for using fast disks (i.e. SSDs) could probably just +> > about meet the benefit of most of the threading/async work. +> > +> > --[[tychoish]] + +>>> It's at this point that doing profiling for a particular site would come +>>> in, because it would depend on the site content and how exactly IkiWiki is +>>> being used as to what the performance bottlenecks would be. For the +>>> original poster, it would be image processing. For me, it tends to be +>>> PageSpecs, because I have a lot of maps and reports. + +>>> But I sincerely don't think that Disk I/O is the main bottleneck, not when +>>> the original poster mentions CPU usage, and also in my experience, I see +>>> IkiWiki chewing up 100% CPU usage one CPU, while the others remain idle. I +>>> haven't noticed slowdowns due to waiting for disk I/O, whether that be a +>>> system with HD or SSD storage. + +>>> I agree that large sites are probably not the most common use-case, but it +>>> can be a chicken-and-egg situation with large sites and complete rebuilds, +>>> since it can often be the case with a large site that rebuilding based on +>>> dependencies takes *longer* than rebuilding the site from scratch, simply +>>> because there are so many pages that are interdependent. It's not always +>>> the number of pages itself, but how the site is being used. If IkiWiki is +>>> used with the absolute minimum number of page-dependencies - that is, no +>>> maps, no sitemaps, no trails, no tags, no backlinks, no albums - then one +>>> can have a very large number of pages without having performance problems. +>>> But when you have a change in PageA affecting PageB which affects PageC, +>>> PageD, PageE and PageF, then performance can drop off horribly. And it's a +>>> trade-off, because having features that interlink pages automatically is +>>> really nifty ad useful - but they have a price. + +>>> I'm not really sure what the best solution is. Me, I profile my IkiWiki builds and try to tweak performance for them... but there's only so much I can do. +>>> --[[KathrynAndersen]] + +>>>> IMHO, the best way to get a multithreaded ikiwiki is to rewrite it +>>>> in haskell, using as much pure code as possible. Many avenues +>>>> then would open up to taking advantage of haskell's ability to +>>>> parallize pure code. +>>>> +>>>> With that said, we already have some nice invariants that could be +>>>> used to parallelize page builds. In particular, we know that +>>>> page A never needs state built up while building page B, for any +>>>> pages A and B that don't have a dependency relationship -- and ikiwiki +>>>> tracks such dependency relationships, although not currently in a form +>>>> that makes it very easy (or fast..) to pick out such groups of +>>>> unrelated pages. +>>>> +>>>> OTOH, there are problems.. building page A can result in changes to +>>>> ikiwiki's state; building page B can result in other changes. All +>>>> such changes would have to be made thread-safely. And would the +>>>> resulting lock contention result in a program that ran any faster +>>>> once parallelized? +>>>> +>>>> Which is why [[rewrite_ikiwiki_in_haskell]], while pretty insane, is +>>>> something I keep thinking about. If only I had a spare year.. +>>>> --[[Joey]]