From: "ioquatix (Samuel Williams)" Date: 2021-10-21T08:58:13+00:00 Subject: [ruby-core:105720] [Ruby master Bug#18258] Ractor.shareable? can be slow and mutates internal object flags. Issue #18258 has been updated by ioquatix (Samuel Williams). I feel from a predictability POV, it would definitely be advantageous to set `RB_FL_SHAREABLE` in every case it's known ahead of time to avoid unexpected overheads. Even if `Ractor.shareable?` is not public interface, it's still used internally in many many places... ---------------------------------------- Bug #18258: Ractor.shareable? can be slow and mutates internal object flags. https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18258#change-94220 * Author: ioquatix (Samuel Williams) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal * Assignee: ko1 (Koichi Sasada) * ruby -v: 3.0.2 * Backport: 2.6: UNKNOWN, 2.7: UNKNOWN, 3.0: UNKNOWN ---------------------------------------- On my computer, even with a relatively small object graph,`Ractor.shareable?` can be quite slow (around 1-2ms). The following example creates an object graph with ~40k objects as an example, and on my computer takes around 20ms to execute `Ractor.shareable?`. Because the object cannot be marked as `RB_FL_SHAREABLE` because it contains mutable state, every time we check `Ractor.shareable?` it will perform the same object traversal which is the slow path. ``` ruby require 'benchmark' class Borked def freeze end end class Nested def initialize(count, top = true) if count > 0 @nested = count.times.map{Nested.new(count - 1, false).freeze}.freeze end if top @borked = Borked.new end end attr :nested attr :borked end def test(n) puts "Creating nested object of size N=#{n}" nested = Nested.new(n).freeze shareable = false result = Benchmark.measure do shareable = Ractor.shareable?(nested) end pp result: result, shareable: shareable end test(8) ``` I propose we change `Ractor.shareable?` to only check `RB_FL_SHAREABLE` which gives (1) predictable and fast performance in every case and (2) avoids mutating internal object flags when performing what looks like a read-only operation. I respect that one way of looking at `Ractor.shareable?` is as a cache for object state. But this kind of cache can lead to unpredictable performance. As a result, something like `String#freeze` would not create objects that can be shared with Ractor. However, I believe we can mitigate this by tweaking `String#freeze` to also set `RB_FL_SHAREABLE` if possible. I believe we should apply this to more objects. It will lead to more predictable performance for Ruby. Since there are few real-world examples of Ractor, it's hard to find real world example of the problem. However, I believe such an issue will prevent Ractor usage as even relatively small object graphs (~1000 objects) can cause 1-2ms of latency, and this particular operation does not release the GVL either which means it stalls the entire VM. This issue came from discussion regarding https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/18035 where we are considering using `RB_FL_SHAREABLE` as a flag for immutability. By fixing this issue, we make it easier to implement model for immutability because we don't need to introduce new flags and can instead reuse existing flags. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/ Unsubscribe: