[ruby-core:59749] Re: Ruby 2.1.0 in Production: known bugs and patches

Thank you for your report.
It helps us and other ruby users!

> Could you clarify the correct procedure for marking backports. Should
> tickets be moved to Backport21, or is simply marking them as Backport:
> "2.1: REQUIRED" enough?

The formal procedure is making backport ticket on
https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/projects/ruby-21/issues .
Backport: "2.1: REQUIRED" is mainly intended to label when it is not fixed yet.


I'm also interested in funny-falcon's patches.
Their improvements are so large but we hadn't verify and merge them yet.
I'm happy if you merge them into trunk with ko1, and ship them with 2.2.

Thanks,

2014/1/14 Aman Gupta <[e-mail]>:
>> If you have some time, can you try to reopen the issues affected, with settings changed similar to https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9168#note-5 (please set assignee to Yui NARUSE).
>
> Could you clarify the correct procedure for marking backports. Should
> tickets be moved to Backport21, or is simply marking them as Backport:
> "2.1: REQUIRED" enough?
>
> Is there a way to search for tickets with the backport field set to required?
>
>> Re. the performance patches, you recommend them for large ruby apps. What about small apps?
>
> They should work equally well in small apps. The patches combined gave
> us a 10% speed boost in our app.
>
> On Sun, Jan 12, 2014 at 7:54 PM, "Martin J. Dst"
> <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Hello Aman,
>>
>> Many thanks for your report. Great news about Ruby 2.1.
>>
>> Today is a holiday in Japan, so responses may not be that quick (or they may
>> be quicker because people don't have to go to work and can hack on Ruby all
>> day :-).
>>
>> If you have some time, can you try to reopen the issues affected, with
>> settings changed similar to https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/9168#note-5
>> (please set assignee to Yui NARUSE).
>>
>> Re. issuing a 2.1.1 release sooner rather than later, last Friday at a small
>> meeting/party to discuss and celebrate the 2.1 release (see , sorry, in
>> Japanese) we discussed the idea of publishing a 2.1.x release about every
>> three months, but earlier if there is a good set of important patches. Your
>> list may be just that.
>>
>> Re. the performance patches, you recommend them for large ruby apps. What
>> about small apps?
>>
>> Regards,    Martin.
>>
>>
>> On 2014/01/13 11:29, Aman Gupta wrote:
>>>
>>> Last week, we upgraded the github.com rails app to ruby 2.1.0 in
>>> production.
>>> While testing the new build for rollout, we ran into a number of bugs.
>>> Most
>>> of
>>> these have been fixed on trunk already, but I've documented them below to
>>> help
>>> anyone else who might be testing ruby 2.1 in production.
>>>
>>> @naruse I think we should backport these patches to the ruby_2_1 branch
>>> and
>>> release 2.1.1 sooner rather than later, as some of the bugs are quite
>>> critical.
>>> I'm happy to offer any assistance I can to expedite this process.
>>>
>>> - Struct#send(:setter=, rhs) does not return rhs
>>>    #9353 (r44501)
>>>    breaks the faraday gem
>>>
>>> - Array#uniq behavior change
>>>    #9340 (r44512)
>>>    affects the sass gem
>>>
>>> - Timeout behavior change
>>>    #9354 (r44517, r44518, r44519)
>>>    #9380 (r44523)
>>>    breaks the faraday gem
>>>
>>> - [BUG] assertion failure in socket.c
>>>    #9352 (r44490, r44496)
>>>    breaks the excon gem
>>>
>>> - segfault in method() usage
>>>    #9334, #9313, #9310, #9326, #9337
>>>    #9315 (r44455, r44458, r44510, r44527, r44552, r44553)
>>>    segv inside activesupport4 and other gems
>>>
>>> - Hash lookup with #hash and #eql broken
>>>    #9381 (r44525, r44534, r44537)
>>>
>>> - bigdecimal division issue
>>>    #9316
>>>    affects some payment processing gems
>>>    workaround patch by @phasis:
>>>      https://github.com/github/ruby/commit/1e778b3b20
>>>
>>> - SizedQueue not working
>>>    #9302, #9343, #9396
>>>    patches by @normalperson:
>>>      https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/attachments/download/4113
>>>      https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/attachments/download/4140
>>>
>>> In addition to the bugfix patches above, we're running the following
>>> performance patches in production. These have proven quite stable in our
>>> environment, so I encourage you to try them if you're running a large ruby
>>> app.
>>>
>>> - funny-falcon's st.c density patch
>>>    https://github.com/github/ruby/commit/1e025cbd2f
>>>
>>> - funny-falcon's st.c pool allocator
>>>    https://github.com/github/ruby/commit/3d37e2b5a3
>>>
>>> - funny-falcon's method cache patch
>>>    https://github.com/funny-falcon/ruby/compare/trunk...class_local_cache
>>>    proposed for trunk in #9262
>>>
>>> - optimized Hash#[] and Hash#[]= with string literals
>>>    https://github.com/github/ruby/commit/86946e72d7
>>>    merged to trunk in #9382 (r44551)
>>>
>>> Aside from the bugs above, our upgrade to 2.1 was very smooth. I'm happy
>>> to
>>> report that github.com is now running faster (and with less GC overhead)
>>> than
>>> ever before.
>>>
>>>    Aman
>>>
>>



-- 
NARUSE, Yui  <[e-mail]>