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

Terraform 0.13, 0.14 performance terrible using binary, good when self built #27143

Closed
19h opened this issue Dec 4, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed
Labels
bug new new issue not yet triaged v0.13 Issues (primarily bugs) reported against v0.13 releases v0.14 Issues (primarily bugs) reported against v0.14 releases waiting for reproduction unable to reproduce issue without further information waiting-response An issue/pull request is waiting for a response from the community

Comments

@19h
Copy link

19h commented Dec 4, 2020

Terraform Version

Terraform v0.14.0
+ provider registry.terraform.io/hashicorp/aws v3.20.0
+ provider registry.terraform.io/hashicorp/github v4.1.0
+ provider registry.terraform.io/hashicorp/template v2.2.0

Verified on macOS Big Sur 11.0, 11.1 Beta.

Using the GitHub binary distributions of 0.13, 0.14 on macOS Big Sur causes a serious slow down of deployment times.

I've been extremely unhappy about this for a while, but chose to compile terraform myself today and it improved the deployment times tenfold.

Since I'm mostly a Rust & C engineer I'm not sure what changes given the custom (non-LLVM / GCC) Go toolchain, but what exactly would change in the network request performance?

@19h 19h added bug new new issue not yet triaged labels Dec 4, 2020
@jbardin
Copy link
Member

jbardin commented Dec 4, 2020

Hi @19h,

This is likely stemming from the same issue as #26532. The only difference you could be making when building locally would be to have CGO enabled, which would allow the native host resolver to be used. You could verify by building with CGO_ENABLED=0, which should give you an identical binary to the release.

@apparentlymart apparentlymart added v0.13 Issues (primarily bugs) reported against v0.13 releases v0.14 Issues (primarily bugs) reported against v0.14 releases labels Dec 5, 2020
@danieldreier
Copy link
Contributor

@19h I think the next troubleshooting steps here are either for you to do your own CGO_ENABLED=0 build and then check whether that build is equally slow to the binary, or for you to share a reproduction case (e.g. some terraform config) that I can run and benchmark here where you're seeing a big performance change. I'm happy to dig in, just want to make sure I'm running the same things you are in order to reproduce the same performance issue.

@danieldreier danieldreier added waiting for reproduction unable to reproduce issue without further information waiting-response An issue/pull request is waiting for a response from the community labels Dec 9, 2020
@jbardin
Copy link
Member

jbardin commented Mar 2, 2021

Closing since we have not heard back. If this does turn out to be a different issue from #26532, feel free to add more information here and we can re-evaluate the issue.

Thanks!

@jbardin jbardin closed this as completed Mar 2, 2021
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Apr 2, 2021

I'm going to lock this issue because it has been closed for 30 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active issues.

If you have found a problem that seems similar to this, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@ghost ghost locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Apr 2, 2021
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
bug new new issue not yet triaged v0.13 Issues (primarily bugs) reported against v0.13 releases v0.14 Issues (primarily bugs) reported against v0.14 releases waiting for reproduction unable to reproduce issue without further information waiting-response An issue/pull request is waiting for a response from the community
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants