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

fix: optimistic parse #541

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 10, 2023
Merged

Conversation

H4ad
Copy link
Contributor

@H4ad H4ad commented Apr 7, 2023

I saw these lines that check if the version is valid and I thought, what if we remove it?

const r = options.loose ? re[t.LOOSE] : re[t.FULL]
if (!r.test(version)) {
return null
}

Well, the perf before:

parse(1.2.1) x 2,282,718 ops/sec ±1.53% (94 runs sampled)
parse(1.2.2-4) x 917,890 ops/sec ±0.79% (88 runs sampled)
parse(1.2.3-pre) x 878,671 ops/sec ±1.07% (91 runs sampled)
invalid parse(90071992547409910.0.0) x 76,913 ops/sec ±0.97% (91 runs sampled)
invalid parse(hello, world) x 27,848,607 ops/sec ±2.58% (89 runs sampled)
invalid parse(xyz) x 28,323,638 ops/sec ±2.53% (88 runs sampled)

Then:

parse(1.2.1) x 2,758,186 ops/sec ±1.72% (94 runs sampled)
parse(1.2.2-4) x 990,634 ops/sec ±0.63% (93 runs sampled)
parse(1.2.3-pre) x 988,248 ops/sec ±1.12% (94 runs sampled)
invalid parse(90071992547409910.0.0) x 75,989 ops/sec ±1.10% (91 runs sampled)
invalid parse(hello, world) x 82,456 ops/sec ±0.74% (93 runs sampled)
invalid parse(xyz) x 83,357 ops/sec ±0.80% (92 runs sampled)

It massive slowdown the invalid cases because Semver throws a exception (which is very slow) and then return null.

But for optimistic cases, we can see a very good speedup.

If we combine this optimization with parseOptions, from:

parse(1.2.1) x 2,526,888 ops/sec ±0.98% (95 runs sampled)
parse(1.2.2-4) x 962,227 ops/sec ±2.39% (94 runs sampled)
parse(1.2.3-pre) x 970,360 ops/sec ±0.19% (93 runs sampled)
invalid parse(90071992547409910.0.0) x 76,354 ops/sec ±1.01% (90 runs sampled)
invalid parse(hello, world) x 29,528,801 ops/sec ±2.66% (93 runs sampled)
invalid parse(xyz) x 30,120,145 ops/sec ±2.43% (87 runs sampled)

We speedup up to:

parse(1.2.1) x 3,552,142 ops/sec ±2.85% (92 runs sampled)
parse(1.2.2-4) x 1,128,861 ops/sec ±0.52% (91 runs sampled)
parse(1.2.3-pre) x 1,109,481 ops/sec ±0.85% (96 runs sampled)
invalid parse(90071992547409910.0.0) x 76,316 ops/sec ±0.73% (90 runs sampled)
invalid parse(hello, world) x 82,178 ops/sec ±0.54% (96 runs sampled)
invalid parse(xyz) x 82,352 ops/sec ±0.77% (91 runs sampled)

The main question is, how often PNPM and NPM see bad package versions?

References

benchmark.js
const Benchmark = require('benchmark');
const parse = require('./functions/parse');
const { MAX_SAFE_INTEGER } = require('./internal/constants');
const suite = new Benchmark.Suite();

const cases = ['1.2.1', '1.2.2-4', '1.2.3-pre'];
const invalidCases = [`${MAX_SAFE_INTEGER}0.0.0`, 'hello, world', 'xyz']

for (const test of cases) {
  suite.add(`parse(${test})`, function () {
    parse(test);
  });
}

for (const test of invalidCases) {
  suite.add(`invalid parse(${test})`, function () {
    parse(test);
  });
}

suite
  .on('cycle', function (event) {
    console.log(String(event.target));
  })
  .run({ async: false });

@H4ad H4ad requested a review from a team as a code owner April 7, 2023 01:20
@H4ad H4ad requested review from fritzy and removed request for a team April 7, 2023 01:20
@H4ad
Copy link
Contributor Author

H4ad commented Apr 7, 2023

@jakebailey Do you have some thoughts on this since you already had some experience benchmarking PNPM?

@wraithgar wraithgar requested review from wraithgar and removed request for fritzy April 7, 2023 03:07
if (!r.test(version)) {
return null
}

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is what the SemVer constructor is doing. As you can see it's not even consistent with this code in that SemVer trim()s the version.

    const m = version.trim().match(options.loose ? re[t.LOOSE] : re[t.FULL])

    if (!m) {
      throw new TypeError(`Invalid Version: ${version}`)
    }

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yep, that's why I removed it, the idea in that test is just to fail-fast.

So, can we consider that a bug or we could try to push this change?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it's evidence in favor of this change. We don't need to optimize for bad semver here, and this PR is also a code cleanup and consistency issue.

@jakebailey
Copy link

Testing on pnpm, I don't see much difference, which doesn't surprise me given pnpm doesn't really call semver.parse.

FWIW, if you want to test the big pnpm DT case, here are some instructions:

  • Clone https://github.com/jakebailey/DefinitelyTyped/tree/pnpm-workspaces-working
  • Clone pnpm
  • In pnpm, run: pnpm install && pnpm run compile && ./pnpm/dev/pd.js --version > /dev/null.
    • This is the fastest way to getting a local build in my experience. pd.js is a wrapper which esbuilds pnpm then runs the output, so you can run it with a dummy flag to cause a build, then use its output file, dist/pnpm.cjs.
  • In DT, run node /path/to/pnpm/pnpm/dev/dist/pnpm.cjs install to populate pnpm's cache.
  • In DT, run git clean -fdx to clear the repo, then node /path/to/pnpm/pnpm/dev/dist/pnpm.cjs install --offline to perform an install using the cached store.

Then to do timing + memory stats, I have a timing.sh with:

#!/usr/bin/zsh

if [[ `uname` == Darwin ]]; then
    MAX_MEMORY_UNITS=KB
else
    MAX_MEMORY_UNITS=MB
fi

TIMEFMT=\
'total time:  %E'$'\n'\
'user time:   %U'$'\n'\
'system time: %S'$'\n'\
'CPU percent: %P'$'\n'\
'max memory:  %M '$MAX_MEMORY_UNITS''$'\n'

time $@

So you can do timing.sh node /path/to/pnpm/pnpm/dev/dist/pnpm.cjs install --offline to get stats.

@wraithgar wraithgar merged commit f8b8b61 into npm:main Apr 10, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2023
@H4ad H4ad deleted the fix/optimistic-parse branch April 10, 2023 17:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants