Skip to content
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

Cache performance has regressed too much #3130

Open
t92549 opened this issue Dec 4, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Cache performance has regressed too much #3130

t92549 opened this issue Dec 4, 2023 · 0 comments
Labels
bug Confirmed or suspected bug
Milestone

Comments

@t92549
Copy link
Contributor

t92549 commented Dec 4, 2023

Describe the bug
Since Gaffer 1 there have been various changes to how the cache works. Most importantly on this topic, the removal of the internal cache of the "Cache" (#2457). However, this was done without any performance tests, and I assert the cache has become unacceptably performant.

Expected behaviour
The cache should perform a lot closer to how it did in Gaffer 1.23.0. I would suggest performance tests to ensure this behaviour is achieved and maintained.

Additional context
As mentioned above, the internal cache was removed. Not only should this have been tested, but the "Cache" code should have been refactored in accordance with the new behaviour. Calls to the cache which were once cheap and done many times in an unoptimised way are now no longer acceptable and create massive performance issues. I think the "Cache", and many things that use it like NamedOperations and the FederatedStore, need to be refactored with performance in mind.

One example of this performance issue is if you start a FederatedStore with a graph in it that also has NamedOperations in the cache. It now takes 3 times as long to start and spams tens of log lines mentioning the NamedOperationResolver.

@t92549 t92549 added the bug Confirmed or suspected bug label Dec 4, 2023
@GCHQDeveloper314 GCHQDeveloper314 added this to the Backlog milestone Mar 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Confirmed or suspected bug
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants