Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Apr 26, 2024. It is now read-only.

synapse 0.99 is slower than 0.34 #4713

Closed
richvdh opened this issue Feb 22, 2019 · 3 comments
Closed

synapse 0.99 is slower than 0.34 #4713

richvdh opened this issue Feb 22, 2019 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
A-Performance Performance, both client-facing and admin-facing

Comments

@richvdh
Copy link
Member

richvdh commented Feb 22, 2019

subjectively, performance seems to be worse since 0.99. It might be just the .well-known stuff, but I'm not sure

@neilisfragile neilisfragile added z-p2 (Deprecated Label) A-Performance Performance, both client-facing and admin-facing p1 and removed z-p2 (Deprecated Label) labels Feb 26, 2019
@richvdh
Copy link
Member Author

richvdh commented Apr 1, 2019

I rolled my server back to 0.34.1, and certainly it felt faster, subjectively. Unfortunately a bunch of other stuff didn't work well, and in any case it's hard to make objective comparisons since a large amount of code has changed.

I suspect the reason for the discrepancy is .well-known fetching. To confirm, I have disabled .well-known support on my server. Will monitor for a while.

@richvdh richvdh self-assigned this Apr 1, 2019
@richvdh
Copy link
Member Author

richvdh commented Apr 3, 2019

I had to re-enable .well-known support so that I could talk to people without SRV records. I can't say that I noticed my homeserver performing much better during the time I had it disabled.

However, one thing I have noticed is that .well-known support significantly increases the memory usage of my homeserver. Typically my HS currently stablises at a usage of around 2G, and this dropped to 1.5G with .well-known support disabled. The .well-known cache sits at around 1500 entries, so I can't believe it's all coming from there - it would imply about 333K per entry, which seems immense. I wonder if the connection pool is hanging on to data it shouldn't. It would probably be fruitful to investigate with a memory profiler.

@richvdh
Copy link
Member Author

richvdh commented May 9, 2019

closing in favour of #5163

@richvdh richvdh closed this as completed May 9, 2019
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
A-Performance Performance, both client-facing and admin-facing
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants