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
perf(ngcc): performance improvements #38840
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
361db00
perf(ngcc): introduce cache for sharing data across entry-points
JoostK 3921763
fixup! perf(ngcc): introduce cache for sharing data across entry-points
JoostK caacb88
fixup! perf(ngcc): introduce cache for sharing data across entry-points
JoostK d96393a
fixup! perf(ngcc): introduce cache for sharing data across entry-points
JoostK 8e91377
fixup! perf(ngcc): introduce cache for sharing data across entry-points
JoostK ad2c5c5
perf(ngcc): reduce maximum worker count
JoostK a90270a
fixup! perf(ngcc): reduce maximum worker count
JoostK 8bf1128
test(ngcc): load standard files only once
JoostK File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Nit: FWIW, I would find it more intuitive to return 0 when there are not enough CPUs for workers (i.e. when
os.cpus().length < 2
).There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That's an interesting point, especially when considering how to configure
NGCC_MAX_WORKERS
. Currently I require that to be at least 1, but that doesn't mean that it'll actually spawn a single worker, as it's smart enough to run it in the same process. So from that perspective, returning 0 here if there's too few CPUs feels inconsistent to me (without also changing how we interpretNGCC_MAX_WORKERS
). I feel it would be quite awkward to allowNGCC_MAX_WORKERS=0
which would operate identically toNGCC_MAX_WORKERS=1
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I don't necessarily agree, but I don't feel strongly about this at all (so it works for me as is) 😅