[#35631] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4558][Open] TestSocket#test_closed_read fails after r31230 — Tomoyuki Chikanaga <redmine@...>

23 messages 2011/04/06

[#35632] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4559][Open] Proc#== does not match the documented behaviour — Adam Prescott <redmine@...>

13 messages 2011/04/06

[#35637] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4561][Open] 1.9.2 requires parentheses around argument of method call in an array, where 1.8.7 did not — Dave Schweisguth <redmine@...>

9 messages 2011/04/07

[#35666] caching of the ancestor chain — Xavier Noria <fxn@...>

Why does Ruby cache the ancestors chain? I mean, not why the implementation implies that, but why it works that way conceptually.

9 messages 2011/04/09

[#35734] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4574][Open] Numeric#within — redmine@...

16 messages 2011/04/13

[#35753] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576][Open] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — redmine@...

61 messages 2011/04/14
[#39566] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...> 2011/09/15

[#39590] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@...> 2011/09/16

[#39593] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — Tanaka Akira <akr@...> 2011/09/16

2011/9/17 Marc-Andre Lafortune <ruby-core@marc-andre.ca>:

[#39608] Re: [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4576] Range#step miss the last value, if end-exclusive and has float number — Masahiro TANAKA <masa16.tanaka@...> 2011/09/17

I have not been watching ruby-core, but let me give a comment for this issue.

[#35765] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4579][Open] SecureRandom + OpenSSL may repeat with fork — redmine@...

27 messages 2011/04/15

[#35866] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4603][Open] lib/csv.rb: when the :encoding parameter is not provided, the encoding of CSV data is treated as ASCII-8BIT — yu nobuoka <nobuoka@...>

13 messages 2011/04/24

[#35879] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4610][Open] Proc#curry behavior is inconsistent with lambdas containing default argument values — Joshua Ballanco <jballanc@...>

11 messages 2011/04/25

[#35883] [Ruby 1.9 - Bug #4611][Open] [BUG] Segementation fault reported — Deryl Doucette <me@...>

15 messages 2011/04/25

[#35895] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4614][Open] [RFC/PATCH] thread_pthread.c: lower RUBY_STACK_MIN_LIMIT to 64K — Eric Wong <normalperson@...>

10 messages 2011/04/25

[ruby-core:35690] [Ruby 1.9 - Feature #4560] [PATCH] lib/net/protocol.rb: avoid exceptions in rbuf_fill

From: redmine@...
Date: 2011-04-10 22:46:42 UTC
List: ruby-core #35690
Issue #4560 has been updated by Charles Nutter.


This is an interesting one. JRuby recently changed how we generate backtraces to using the Java backtrace as the master. This means our backtraces are as expensive to generate as a full Java backtrace for the full stack (think generating a backtrace for all Ruby and C and intermediate calls in Ruby). As a result, any algorithms that generate backtraces as part of normal flow control took a big perf hit.

On JRuby master, I've made a change that does not generate backtraces for EAGAIN, to avoid the overhead of generating it for the expected case of read_nonblock having nothing available. But it's a bit of a band-aid. The overhead from even *creating* an exception can be weigh into a tight loop over read_nonblock when there's nothing available, and of course having the backtrace disabled could annoy someone if it leaked out (JRuby points them to a flag to turn the backtraces on). Not sure what's the best long-term solution.

Also, the 1.9 practice of mixing in WaitReadable is really dreadful. It's bad enough in JRuby that it has to construct a new singleton class for every raised exception, but the cache effects in 1.9 are really painful.
----------------------------------------
Feature #4560: [PATCH] lib/net/protocol.rb: avoid exceptions in rbuf_fill
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org/issues/4560

Author: Eric Wong
Status: Open
Priority: Low
Assignee: 
Category: lib
Target version: 1.9.x


Blindly hitting IO#read_nonblock() and raising is expensive due
to two factors:

1) method cache being scanned/cleared when the IO::WaitReadable
extended class is GC-ed
2) backtrace generation

This reduces the likelyhood of an IO::WaitReadable exception,
but spurious wakeup can still occur due to bad TCP checksums.

This optimization only applies to non-OpenSSL sockets.  I am
using IO#wait here instead of IO.select() since IO#wait is not
available on OpenSSL sockets.



-- 
http://redmine.ruby-lang.org

In This Thread