-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 18.1k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
CoW: Use exponential backoff when clearing dead references #55518
Changes from 4 commits
79c663f
a2f81a4
4423d19
d4c159b
da639c8
4d8c8fb
dd202a6
4664c52
4227598
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -890,17 +890,25 @@ cdef class BlockValuesRefs: | |
""" | ||
cdef: | ||
public list referenced_blocks | ||
public int clear_counter | ||
|
||
def __cinit__(self, blk: Block | None = None) -> None: | ||
if blk is not None: | ||
self.referenced_blocks = [weakref.ref(blk)] | ||
else: | ||
self.referenced_blocks = [] | ||
self.clear_counter = 500 # set reasonably high | ||
|
||
def _clear_dead_references(self) -> None: | ||
self.referenced_blocks = [ | ||
ref for ref in self.referenced_blocks if ref() is not None | ||
] | ||
def _clear_dead_references(self, force=False) -> None: | ||
jreback marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved
Hide resolved
|
||
if force or len(self.referenced_blocks) > self.clear_counter: | ||
self.referenced_blocks = [ | ||
ref for ref in self.referenced_blocks if ref() is not None | ||
] | ||
nr_of_refs = len(self.referenced_blocks) | ||
if nr_of_refs < self.clear_counter // 2: | ||
self.clear_counter = max(self.clear_counter // 2, 500) | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I would suggest a shrink factor of 4 or more. If it's the same as the growth factor it can create a few corner cases that will still have O(n^2). e.g. length going back and forth between (500*2^n)-1 and (500*2^n)+1 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Couldn't this happen as well for a shrink factor of 4? And this would only happen If we have this interleaved with inlace modifications, e.g if force=True, correct? Merging for now, but happy to follow up There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1 There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. For a factor of 4 you would need to change the length to the extremes of the range [500*2^(n-1); 500*2^n], which is at least 500 (and more for a larger n), this is much better than triggering the slow operation on just adding and removing 3 references. |
||
elif nr_of_refs > self.clear_counter: | ||
self.clear_counter = max(self.clear_counter * 2, nr_of_refs) | ||
|
||
def add_reference(self, blk: Block) -> None: | ||
"""Adds a new reference to our reference collection. | ||
|
@@ -934,6 +942,6 @@ cdef class BlockValuesRefs: | |
------- | ||
bool | ||
""" | ||
self._clear_dead_references() | ||
self._clear_dead_references(force=True) | ||
# Checking for more references than block pointing to itself | ||
return len(self.referenced_blocks) > 1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The regression occurs without Copy-on-Write too. I think we should mention that here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah I struggled a bit with the wording, any suggestions?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe
?
I think it's better to leave the copy-on-write part out - I personally couldn't find a way to word it without making it seem like the issue was with Copy-on-Write on only.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah I am not really happy with listing methods, since this affects all kinds of things with wide data frames