Re: Processing large amounts of files

[Liliana Marie Prikler]

Am Donnerstag, dem 21.03.2024 um 15:34 +0100 schrieb Ricardo Wurmus:
> [-guix-devel@gnu.org, +gwl-devel@gnu.org]
oops D:
> 
> [...]
> When running with "-l all" I see this:
> 
>   info: .75 Computing workflow `cat'...
>   debug: 3.13 Computing script for process `meow'
>   guix: 3.13 Looking up package `bash-minimal'
>   guix: 3.13 Opening inferior Guix at
> `/gnu/store/pb1nkrn3sg6a1j6c4r5j2ahygkf4vkv9-profile'
>   guix: 4.27 Looking up package `guix'
>   debug: 4.45 Generating all scripts and their dependencies.
>   debug: 4.89 Generating all scripts and their dependencies.
>   run: 6.73 Executing: /bin/sh -c
> /gnu/store/5idhbvhrwj3p53kkz2vikdn1ypncwj84-gwl-meow.scm '((inputs
> "/tmp/meow/0" ...
>   process: 8.80 In execvp of /bin/sh: Argument list too long
>   error: 8.80 Wrong type argument in position 1: #f
> 
> This at least tells us that the last error here is due to sh refusing
> to run.
Good to know, and I thought it'd be just that, but… shouldn't this
failure to invoke sh be caught through something?

> > For comparison:
> >   time cat /tmp/meow/{0..7769}
> >   […]
> >   
> >   real  0m0,144s
> >   user  0m0,049s
> >   sys   0m0,094s
> > 
> > It takes GWL 6 times longer to compute the workflow than to create
> > the inputs in Guile, and 600 times longer than to actually execute
> > the shell command.  I think there is room for improvement :)
> 
> Yeah, not good.  Do you have any recommendations?
We already talked about this in response to your second mail, but (LRU)
Caching of things that can be cached would be an approach to take. 
Perhaps there's also inefficiencies in auto-connecting inputs – not
exhibited by this example, but thinkable.

Design-wise, we might need a way of splitting large worfklows anyhow. 
Files and environment variables work, but feel clunky at the moment,
and particular files remind me about recursive make… maybe when I get
the time, I can code something up and then look at ways for
simplification.

Cheers