Project

General

Profile

Bug #12107

Updated by Tom Clegg over 7 years ago

It's typical for jobs.create to take ~6 seconds, with the database only accounting for about 75ms. 

 Our "copy commit to internal.git and tag it" procedure might be responsible for a significant portion of this. 

 Currently, when creating a new job, source:services/api/app/models/commit.rb does this, whether or not the commit already exists in internal.git: 

 <pre><code class="ruby"> 
     must_pipe("echo #{sha1.shellescape}", 
               "git --git-dir #{src_gitdir.shellescape} pack-objects -q --revs --stdout", 
               "git --git-dir #{dst_gitdir.shellescape} unpack-objects -q") 
     must_git(dst_gitdir, 
              "tag --force #{tag.shellescape} #{sha1.shellescape}") 
 </code></pre> 

 Using a copy of an internal.git repo from a production cluster on my workstation, and a commit that is already present in internal.git, I found 

 |git operations                         |time    || 
 |pack-objects &#x7c; unpack-objects     |4-5s    || 
 |fetch file:///src_gitdir $sha1         |35s     |including initial auto gc            | 
 |fetch file:///src_gitdir $sha1         |12-14s|while auto gc running in background| 
 |fetch file:///src_gitdir $sha1         |1s      |after gc done                        | 

 Proposed improvements: 
 * Check whether the commit is already present in internal.git before copying it. 
 ** @[[ `git rev-parse --verify $sha1^{commit}` = $sha1 ]]@ it ("git rev-list -n1 ${sha1}" takes &lt;60ms for both success and fail cases. cases). 
 * Use "git fetch file://..." instead of "pack|unpack" to avoid unnecessary work (with the pipe method, pack-objects has to prepare the entire pack whether it's needed or not; fetch is surely smarter). 
 ** @git fetch --no-tags file://$src_gitdir $sha1:refs/tags/$uuid@ takes ~1s including adding/updating the tag. 
 * See if there's a way to do this even more efficiently in cases where the commit isn't yet present. "fetch" takes 1s even when the commit is already present, so perhaps there's another way that finds more shortcuts. 

Back