[Vm-dev] Fwd: Re: [Pharo-dev] OSProcess in 3.0

[Eliot Miranda]

Hi Esteban,

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 12:13 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> On 16 Oct 2014, at 21:01, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Phil,
>
> On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:11 PM, phil at highoctane.be <phil at highoctane.be>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> How to include aioplugin in pharovm?
>>
>
> Ask Esteban and other members of the Pharo team.  The AioPlugin is already
> included in the Squeak Cog and Interpreter VMs.  Since the build process is
> different for Pharo (CMake and VMMakerConfigurqation (sp?) based) telling
> you how my builds work won't help.  But if you want you could try and use
> one of the latest VMs from my website (see the Downloads link) and you
> should find that'll work as a Pharo VM.
>
>
> AioPlugin is since always in the mac version of the Pharo VM.
> I don’t know why is not in the others, but my best guess is because I was
> not maintaining them at the time and when I took over I didn’t revised the
> process :P
> I will see what I can do :)
>

It isn't relevant for Windows so you only need to add it to the linux
builds.


>
> Esteban
>
>
>
> HTH
> Eliot
>
>> See messages below for the reason why.
>>
>> Phil
>> ---------- Message transféré ----------
>> De : "David T. Lewis" <lewis at mail.msen.com>
>> Date : 16 oct. 2014 01:30
>> Objet : Re: [Pharo-dev] OSProcess in 3.0
>> À : "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev at lists.pharo.org>
>> Cc :
>>
>> On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 09:35:44PM +0200, Thierry Goubier wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > Le 14/10/2014 14:15, David T. Lewis a ?crit :
>> > >On Tue, Oct 14, 2014 at 07:19:10AM +0200, Thierry Goubier wrote:
>> > >>Hi Dave,
>> > >>
>> > >>took me a while to do some testing. It seems there is an issue, but I
>> > >>couldn't find out where. First, the data:
>> > >>
>> > >>Loading a package from a local gitfiletree repository (get from the
>> > >>command a zipped git archive containing the package) :
>> > >>
>> > >>4.5.11, 4.6.8: 2132 msec.
>> > >>4.5.12, 4.6.9: 50847 msec.
>> > >>
>> > >>I tried to rewrite the main command, remove the closePipes, etc... No
>> > >>change in the runtime, so your right.
>> > >>
>> > >>Profiling doesn't help much: execution time is mostly idle time (but
>> > >>with a significant increase on PipeableOSProcess commands: goes from
>> > >>invisible to 2700 ms. A user break in the middle shows it delay
>> waiting
>> > >>on output of the external process).
>> > >>
>> > >>Only hint I could see is that it seems to be linked with the size of
>> the
>> > >>output of the command.
>> > >
>> > >Thierry,
>> > >
>> > >Aha! I am quite sure that you have located the problem. There must be
>> > >something preventing the OS process from running to completion with
>> > >a larger amount of output data. It definitely sounds like a bug in my
>> > >latest update to Pipeable OSProcess.
>> >
>> > The strange thing is that it runs to completion (i.e. I got no errors;
>> > if any data was missing or corrupted on output, my load would fail); but
>> > a lot slower than it should be.
>> >
>> > >Thank you very much for finding this. I will get it fixed as quickly
>> > >as I can.
>> >
>> > Thanks. I'm unable to help you much, I'm afraid :(
>>
>> Thierry,
>>
>> I do not yet have a solution to this, but I have been able to confirm
>> that the performance difference that you see is primarily associated with
>> the AioPlugin not being present in your VM.
>>
>> When I changed PipeableOSProcess to handle pipe handle closing properly,
>> I used a buffered output stream that is driven by aio events. When data
>> is available to be read from the external OS process, an aio notification
>> pulls the available data into the buffered stream, and when no more data
>> is available, the pipe (file) handles are closed.
>>
>> If the plugin is not present in the VM, I provided a polling mechanism
>> to read data from the external OS process. Apparently this is very
>> inefficient, and I am sure it could be greatly improved. That is the
>> cause of the extremely slow performance that you are seeing.
>>
>> So in summary: The enhancement to PipeableOSProcess relies on an aio
>> event driven reader, and if the AIO plugin is missing, the fallback code
>> relies on polling, and is horribly inefficient.
>>
>> More to follow, and thank you again for identifying the problem.
>>
>> If you can convice your VM vendor to include AioPlugin in your VM, that
>> would be helpful also ;-)
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> best,
> Eliot
>
>
>
>


-- 
best,
Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20141017/e6fdb7da/attachment-0001.htm