performance issues due to breadth first execution of grapqhl queries in case of async resolvers during calls burst
Nadie ha tomado este issue todavía.
Evaluación
- Dificultad
- 5/5
- Tiempo estimado
- Más de una semana
- Aptitud para principiantes
- 25/100
Línea de trabajo
Comienza con la prueba de concepto de asyncio del issue y el punto de entrada schema.execute_async; después, sigue cómo se planifican y resuelven los campos asíncronos de GraphQL. Compara ese comportamiento con la cola de tareas de asyncio en consultas concurrentes. La tarea se considerará completada cuando exista un enfoque acordado de planificación o prioridades, demostrado mediante el escenario de ráfaga descrito, sin degradar el tiempo de ejecución ni el uso de memoria.
Escrito por el modelo de indexación a partir del texto del issue.
Descripción
When we receive calls burst we found that the calls "wait each other" (i.e. the first call of the burst waits the last one).
This result in degradation of performances in both time of execution and memory consumption in the server because we have to keep many calls in fly.
This is particularly evident in big graphql queries where the users request many fields and we have several depth in the queries where each level has many async fields.
Just to be TLDR, looking the implementations of graphql and asyncio we understood that this is due to the following:
- graphql breadth first way to schedule and resolve the fields
- asyncio internal FIFO queue of tasks to be executed
As an example lets have queries like that, where data may be like beer vendors and we want for each beer vendor many fields that describes that vendor, a1...a100, b1...b100, ...:
query {
data {
a1 {
b1 {
c1
...
c100
}
...
b100 {
c1
...
c100
}
}
...
a100 { ... }
}
}
If we have n of this calls coming in burst when we arrive to the depth of the c fields we have many many task scheduled in the asyncio queue.
If we check the of order of execution we have that the first query, on each level, "waits" the other queries, because all the queries schedules a lot of tasks.
In the proof of concept, that you may find at the end of the post, you can verify the order of execution of the resolvers.
It could be very nice to have some sort of priority in the order to let the first query not wait the scheduling and resolve of all the queries before ending.
I understand that this is something between graphql and asyncio but i think it could affect the use of graphql in environments receiving many calls.
Fixes, helps and hints in how to improve this would be very appreciated.
import asyncio
from graphene import ObjectType, Schema, String, Field
FIELD_NUMBER = 2
CONCURRENT_QUERIES = 10
def make_resolver(i, j=None):
async def resolver(self, info):
print(f"START query {info.context['query_number']} | a{i} | b{j}")
await asyncio.sleep(0.001)
print(f"END query {info.context['query_number']} | a{i} | b{j}")
return i
return resolver
def create_fields():
fields = {}
for i in range(FIELD_NUMBER):
inner_fields = {}
for j in range(FIELD_NUMBER):
inner_fields[f"b{j}"] = String()
inner_fields[f"resolve_b{j}"] = make_resolver(i, j)
MyType = type(
f"MyType",
(ObjectType,),
inner_fields,
)
fields[f"a{i}"] = Field(MyType)
fields[f"resolve_a{i}"] = make_resolver(i)
return fields
async def make_query(schema, query_number):
inner_query_values = [f"b{i}" for i in range(FIELD_NUMBER)]
query_values = [
"a%s {%s}" % (i, " ".join(inner_query_values)) for i in range(FIELD_NUMBER)
]
query_string = "{ %s }" % (" ".join(query_values),)
await schema.execute_async(
query_string, context_value=dict(query_number=query_number)
)
async def main():
Query = type("Query", (ObjectType,), create_fields())
schema = Schema(query=Query)
await asyncio.gather(*[make_query(schema, i) for i in range(CONCURRENT_QUERIES)])
asyncio.run(main())
- Lenguaje dominante
- Python
- Estrellas
- 531
- Forks
- 147
- Métricas de merge de PR
- Sin PR fusionados en 30 d
Guía de contribución
No hay ninguna guía de contribución indexada para este repositorio
Primeros pasos
- Lee el issue completo y luego la guía de contribución del proyecto.
- Comenta en el issue que vas a ocuparte — evita que dos personas hagan lo mismo.
- Haz un fork del repositorio y trabaja en una rama.
- Abre un pull request que haga referencia al número del issue.
Más de graphql-python/graphql-core
-
Dificultad 4/5 3-5 días Aptitud para principiantes 50/100
graphql-python/graphql-core#272 · 1 comentario ·
-
Dificultad 3/5 1-2 días Aptitud para principiantes 55/100
graphql-python/graphql-core#269 · 1 comentario ·
-
Publish a major version Abierto
Dificultad 5/5 Más de una semana Aptitud para principiantes 35/100
graphql-python/graphql-core#267 · 1 comentario ·
-
Dificultad 3/5 1-2 días Aptitud para principiantes 45/100
graphql-python/graphql-core#257 ·
-
Dificultad 5/5 Más de una semana Aptitud para principiantes 25/100
graphql-python/graphql-core#247 · 8 comentarios ·
Todos los issues de graphql-python/graphql-core
Issues similares
-
essnmx good first issue
Dificultad 1/5 Menos de una hora Aptitud para principiantes 95/100
-
[Feature] 奇物选择添加优先级 Abierto
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 65/100
syfoud/Simulated_Scepter#174 ·
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 75/100
Giskard-AI/giskard-oss#2840 · 1 comentario ·
-
A claim comment carrying the issue number is silently declined while the workflow reports success Abiertoarea: repo bug perceived difficulty: 2
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 70/100
-
Dificultad 2/5 1-3 horas Aptitud para principiantes 75/100
yeti-platform/yeti#1380 ·