-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 5.8k
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
[Data] Performance regression in iter_batches
prefetching
#35521
Comments
amogkam
added
data
Ray Data-related issues
P0
Issues that should be fixed in short order
labels
May 18, 2023
Confirmed that reverting #34871 fixes the regression: #35522 (comment) |
amogkam
added
core
Issues that should be addressed in Ray Core
and removed
data
Ray Data-related issues
labels
May 19, 2023
amogkam
added
Ray 2.6
and removed
release-blocker
P0 Issue that blocks the release
labels
May 19, 2023
amogkam
added
data
Ray Data-related issues
and removed
core
Issues that should be addressed in Ray Core
labels
May 31, 2023
raulchen
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
Jun 1, 2023
## Why are these changes needed? `WaitBlockPrefetcher` will blockingly wait for the first block. When prefetch size is small, this can cause latency on the critical path. This PR moves the wait to a background thread. ## Related issue number closes #35521
arvind-chandra
pushed a commit
to lmco/ray
that referenced
this issue
Aug 31, 2023
## Why are these changes needed? `WaitBlockPrefetcher` will blockingly wait for the first block. When prefetch size is small, this can cause latency on the critical path. This PR moves the wait to a background thread. ## Related issue number closes ray-project#35521 Signed-off-by: e428265 <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Performance regression with
prefetch_batches=1
no longer having any performance improvement compared toprefetch_batches=0
.This happened between 4/28-5/1.
Last ok commit: 23d7e9f
Failing commit: 7071a4f
Likely culprit seems to be #34871
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: