[ruby-core:116827] [Ruby master Feature#20276] Introduce Fiber interfaces for Ractors
Issue #20276 has been reported by forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung). ---------------------------------------- Feature #20276: Introduce Fiber interfaces for Ractors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20276 * Author: forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) * Status: Open * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- ## Motivation I am trying to build a web server with Ractors. The lifecycle for a request in the current implementation is 1. main ractor buffers request 2. main ractor sends request to worker ractor 3. worker ractor sends response to main ractor 4. main ractor writes response 5. repeat The main ractor utilizes the Async gem (specifically async-http) to handle connections concurrently, meaning each request is handled on a separate fiber. The issue I am running into is after I send a request to a worker ractor, I need to do a blocking wait until I receive a response. While I am waiting for the response, I cannot take any more connections. ## Solution If the fiber scheduler had a hook for `Ractor.receive` or `Ractor#take` (both of which are blocking), the main ractor can send the message, handle other connections while the worker processes the request. When the worker produces a message, it will then take the reqeust and write it in the socket. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #20276 has been updated by ko1 (Koichi Sasada). Status changed from Open to Feedback I understand the motivation but now the ractor-thread combination is not well-defined yet and combination with Fiber (scheduler) is also earlier (because of specification and implementation). ---------------------------------------- Feature #20276: Introduce Fiber interfaces for Blocking operations on Ractors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20276#change-106861 * Author: forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) * Status: Feedback * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- ### Motivation I am trying to build a web server with Ractors. The lifecycle for a request in the current implementation is 1. main ractor sends request to worker ractor 2. worker ractor handles response 3. worker ractor sends response to main ractor 4. main ractor writes response 5. repeat The main ractor utilizes the Async gem (specifically async-http) to handle connections concurrently, meaning each request is handled on a separate fiber. The issue I am running into is after I send a request to a worker ractor, I need to do a blocking wait until I receive a response. While I am waiting for the response, I cannot take any more connections. ### Solution If the fiber scheduler had a hook for `Ractor.receive` or `Ractor#take` (both of which are blocking), the main ractor can send the message, handle other connections while the worker processes the request. When the worker produces a message, it will then take the reqeust and write it in the socket. Specifically, I think the `block` and `unblock` hooks should be implemented for Ractors, considering Threads and Mutexes already use them. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #20276 has been updated by forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung). ko1 (Koichi Sasada) wrote in #note-2:
I understand the motivation but now the ractor-thread combination is not well-defined yet and combination with Fiber (scheduler) is also earlier (because of Ractor's specification and implementation).
I actually tried writing out some code to picture how this might be implemented, and I understand the complexity now. In the current implementation `rb_fiber_scheduler_block/unblock`, if `ractor_a` were to call `ractor_b.take` we would need the following process: 1. `ractor_a` emits `block` event to `ractor_a`'s scheduler 2. `ractor_a`'s current fiber yields, and different fiber runs on `ractor_a` 3. `ractor_b` calls yield 4. `ractor_b` emits `unblock` event to **`ractor_a`**'s scheduler With the strict object sharing rules between ractors, I can see why it may require a major rewrite to make Ractor blocking operations a fiber-scheduler event. How is this alternative? Instead of relying on automatic scheduling via Fiber scheduler events, we can rely a bit on programmer intervention. If there is a method like `Ractor#take_nonblock` which works similar to `IO#read_nonblock`, the programmer can write code like ```ruby loop do msg = other_ractor.take_nonblock rescue Errno::EAGAIN task.yield retry end ``` This may not be 100% efficient since the scheduler would need to continuously "ask", but better than this not being possible at all. ---------------------------------------- Feature #20276: Introduce Fiber interfaces for Blocking operations on Ractors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20276#change-106881 * Author: forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) * Status: Feedback * Priority: Normal ---------------------------------------- ### Motivation I am trying to build a web server with Ractors. The lifecycle for a request in the current implementation is 1. main ractor sends request to worker ractor 2. worker ractor handles response 3. worker ractor sends response to main ractor 4. main ractor writes response 5. repeat The main ractor utilizes the Async gem (specifically async-http) to handle connections concurrently, meaning each request is handled on a separate fiber. The issue I am running into is after I send a request to a worker ractor, I need to do a blocking wait until I receive a response. While I am waiting for the response, I cannot take any more connections. ### Solution If the fiber scheduler had a hook for `Ractor.receive` or `Ractor#take` (both of which are blocking), the main ractor can send the message, handle other connections while the worker processes the request. When the worker produces a message, it will then take the reqeust and write it in the socket. Specifically, I think the `block` and `unblock` hooks should be implemented for Ractors, considering Threads and Mutexes already use them. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #20276 has been updated by ioquatix (Samuel Williams). I support this proposal. A simple way to deal with this right now might be the following code (I have not tested it): ```ruby Thread.new do other_ractor.take end.value ``` In general, the `block`/`unblock` operations should be sufficient, but it might require the ability for `Ractor` to invoke functionality across it's boundary OR we might need to implement some RPC mechanism (this is common in Actor based concurrency). ---------------------------------------- Feature #20276: Introduce Fiber interfaces for Blocking operations on Ractors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20276#change-107175 * Author: forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) * Status: Feedback ---------------------------------------- ### Motivation I am trying to build a web server with Ractors. The lifecycle for a request in the current implementation is 1. main ractor sends request to worker ractor 2. worker ractor handles response 3. worker ractor sends response to main ractor 4. main ractor writes response 5. repeat The main ractor utilizes the Async gem (specifically async-http) to handle connections concurrently, meaning each request is handled on a separate fiber. The issue I am running into is after I send a request to a worker ractor, I need to do a blocking wait until I receive a response. While I am waiting for the response, I cannot take any more connections. ### Solution If the fiber scheduler had a hook for `Ractor.receive` or `Ractor#take` (both of which are blocking), the main ractor can send the message, handle other connections while the worker processes the request. When the worker produces a message, it will then take the reqeust and write it in the socket. Specifically, I think the `block` and `unblock` hooks should be implemented for Ractors, considering Threads and Mutexes already use them. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #20276 has been updated by forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung). ioquatix (Samuel Williams) wrote in #note-4:
I support this proposal.
A simple way to deal with this right now might be the following code (I have not tested it):
```ruby Thread.new do other_ractor.take end.value ```
In general, the `block`/`unblock` operations should be sufficient, but it might require the ability for `Ractor` to invoke functionality across it's boundary OR we might need to implement some RPC mechanism (this is common in Actor based concurrency).
Tested on locally and it seems to work, at least with Async. Here's my code. ```ruby Async do |task| 1.upto(3) do r = Ractor.new do Ractor.recv fib = ->(x) { x < 2 ? 1 : fib.call(x - 2) + fib.call(x - 1) } puts "fin" end task.async do Thread.new do r.send(nil) # ractor start r.take end.value end end end ``` Not very scientific but the results are printed at roughly the same time. ---------------------------------------- Feature #20276: Introduce Fiber interfaces for Blocking operations on Ractors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20276#change-107183 * Author: forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) * Status: Feedback ---------------------------------------- ### Motivation I am trying to build a web server with Ractors. The lifecycle for a request in the current implementation is 1. main ractor sends request to worker ractor 2. worker ractor handles response 3. worker ractor sends response to main ractor 4. main ractor writes response 5. repeat The main ractor utilizes the Async gem (specifically async-http) to handle connections concurrently, meaning each request is handled on a separate fiber. The issue I am running into is after I send a request to a worker ractor, I need to do a blocking wait until I receive a response. While I am waiting for the response, I cannot take any more connections. ### Solution If the fiber scheduler had a hook for `Ractor.receive` or `Ractor#take` (both of which are blocking), the main ractor can send the message, handle other connections while the worker processes the request. When the worker produces a message, it will then take the reqeust and write it in the socket. Specifically, I think the `block` and `unblock` hooks should be implemented for Ractors, considering Threads and Mutexes already use them. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #20276 has been updated by forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung). On a side note, I may have unintentionally discovered an IRB bug in the process. If you run the above in IRB and use Ctrl-C to exit, IRB hangs and becomes unresponsive. ---------------------------------------- Feature #20276: Introduce Fiber interfaces for Blocking operations on Ractors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20276#change-107184 * Author: forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) * Status: Feedback ---------------------------------------- ### Motivation I am trying to build a web server with Ractors. The lifecycle for a request in the current implementation is 1. main ractor sends request to worker ractor 2. worker ractor handles response 3. worker ractor sends response to main ractor 4. main ractor writes response 5. repeat The main ractor utilizes the Async gem (specifically async-http) to handle connections concurrently, meaning each request is handled on a separate fiber. The issue I am running into is after I send a request to a worker ractor, I need to do a blocking wait until I receive a response. While I am waiting for the response, I cannot take any more connections. ### Solution If the fiber scheduler had a hook for `Ractor.receive` or `Ractor#take` (both of which are blocking), the main ractor can send the message, handle other connections while the worker processes the request. When the worker produces a message, it will then take the reqeust and write it in the socket. Specifically, I think the `block` and `unblock` hooks should be implemented for Ractors, considering Threads and Mutexes already use them. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #20276 has been updated by ioquatix (Samuel Williams). If I had to take a guess, I'd say it's a bug with waiting on a Ractor while handling signals? ---------------------------------------- Feature #20276: Introduce Fiber interfaces for Blocking operations on Ractors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20276#change-107198 * Author: forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) * Status: Feedback ---------------------------------------- ### Motivation I am trying to build a web server with Ractors. The lifecycle for a request in the current implementation is 1. main ractor sends request to worker ractor 2. worker ractor handles response 3. worker ractor sends response to main ractor 4. main ractor writes response 5. repeat The main ractor utilizes the Async gem (specifically async-http) to handle connections concurrently, meaning each request is handled on a separate fiber. The issue I am running into is after I send a request to a worker ractor, I need to do a blocking wait until I receive a response. While I am waiting for the response, I cannot take any more connections. ### Solution If the fiber scheduler had a hook for `Ractor.receive` or `Ractor#take` (both of which are blocking), the main ractor can send the message, handle other connections while the worker processes the request. When the worker produces a message, it will then take the reqeust and write it in the socket. Specifically, I think the `block` and `unblock` hooks should be implemented for Ractors, considering Threads and Mutexes already use them. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
Issue #20276 has been updated by forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung). ioquatix (Samuel Williams) wrote in #note-7:
If I had to take a guess, I'd say it's a bug with waiting on a Ractor while handling signals?
Under closer inspection, the `Thread#join` workaround should work in theory but actually deadlocks in practice, likely due to an implementation bug. [Here](https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20346)'s the relevant bug report. IRB is likely unresponsive because of this deadlock. ---------------------------------------- Feature #20276: Introduce Fiber interfaces for Blocking operations on Ractors https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/issues/20276#change-107303 * Author: forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) * Status: Feedback ---------------------------------------- ### Motivation I am trying to build a web server with Ractors. The lifecycle for a request in the current implementation is 1. main ractor sends request to worker ractor 2. worker ractor handles response 3. worker ractor sends response to main ractor 4. main ractor writes response 5. repeat The main ractor utilizes the Async gem (specifically async-http) to handle connections concurrently, meaning each request is handled on a separate fiber. The issue I am running into is after I send a request to a worker ractor, I need to do a blocking wait until I receive a response. While I am waiting for the response, I cannot take any more connections. ### Solution If the fiber scheduler had a hook for `Ractor.receive` or `Ractor#take` (both of which are blocking), the main ractor can send the message, handle other connections while the worker processes the request. When the worker produces a message, it will then take the reqeust and write it in the socket. Specifically, I think the `block` and `unblock` hooks should be implemented for Ractors, considering Threads and Mutexes already use them. -- https://bugs.ruby-lang.org/
participants (3)
-
forthoney (Seong-Heon Jung) -
ioquatix (Samuel Williams)
-
ko1 (Koichi Sasada)