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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
feat: Lint files in parallel if many files exist #42
feat: Lint files in parallel if many files exist #42
Changes from all commits
8059376
dc64c57
f8a9665
bd6fd46
9fec86a
1a38db1
75e7a3c
61206de
d274abb
8d352aa
b761776
f3733e5
bd3f6eb
0425813
c28223d
075ccad
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
os.cpus().length
returns virtual cpu count. In my experience with the PoC eslint/eslint#12191 it was more performant to use 1 worker per physical core, anything more was causing more overhead than improvement. The node modulephysical-cpu-count
seemed to work fine to get the physical cpu count as there is no native way to get that.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.
In your case, how many files did each worker lint? If a worker lints a few files, it will be slow as expected. This proposal calculates the proper number of workers by the number of target files.
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.
In the PoC eslint/eslint#12191
it seemed that readFileSync was much faster than the promisified version (using utils.promisify), but I only tested it on my local machine (MacOs). So it might be worth benchmarking.
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.
the comparison would be between readFile promisfied and not, not readFileSync.
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.
This proposal parallelize linting by non-blocking IO even if it doesn't use workers. Would you provide the comparison of linting in series with
readFileSync
and linting in parallel byreadFile
? If the former is faster, maybe we should update this proposal.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.
Can the fact that in some cases the linting will happen in the main thread and in other in worker threads create a scenario where some plugins work well in just one of the two cases?
To mitigate that, would it maybe be preferable to always use workers in Step 2, even when just a single worker is required?
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.
Because
worker_threads
got stable recently, this RFC useschild_process
if Node.js is older. Spawning child processes spent time (about 1 sec) on Windows. Anyway, ESLint has to find config files, parse it, and verify it in all of every worker and the main thread, and the cost is not small.Therefore, I don't think good if ESLint always uses workers.