diff options
author | BonfaceKilz | 2021-10-08 23:54:21 +0300 |
---|---|---|
committer | BonfaceKilz | 2021-10-08 23:54:21 +0300 |
commit | 2c0b09f351d2f277042074220b528fdeb146e954 (patch) | |
tree | d9d909346dcc60fbc0de77808cdf728c47460991 /issues/slow-correlations.gmi | |
parent | e8ddd4badfa07ae722e674050ea360638b1079a2 (diff) | |
download | gn-gemtext-2c0b09f351d2f277042074220b528fdeb146e954.tar.gz |
Add issue on slow correlations
Diffstat (limited to 'issues/slow-correlations.gmi')
-rw-r--r-- | issues/slow-correlations.gmi | 93 |
1 files changed, 93 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/issues/slow-correlations.gmi b/issues/slow-correlations.gmi new file mode 100644 index 0000000..30cd980 --- /dev/null +++ b/issues/slow-correlations.gmi @@ -0,0 +1,93 @@ +# Slow Correlations and UI crashes + +Correlations for huge data set(like the exo dataset) is very slow; and the UI crashes. + +## Tasks + +* assigned: bonfacekilz, alex +* keywords: critical bug, in progress + +* [ ] Caching slow queries +* [ ] Server side pagination + +## Background + +First, what we've done: + +- Optimised a bunch of SQL. +- https://mariadb.com/kb/en/query-cache/ +- General code clean-up in some places. +- Futile experiments with code parallelisation. +- Add a "test compute" button. More on this later. + +As Rob has pointed out before, gn2 is much much slower than +gn1. Before, we mistakenly thought that it was because that it only +computed one of the correlations; but Zach correctly pointed out that +it, gn1, did in fact still compute all correlations in a similar +fashion to gn2. + +The problems we have with gn2 are 2-fold: + +- Slow computations +- UI crashing on our users for huge datasets + +We took a step back; tried to probe deeper how we do correlations. To +do a correlation, we need to run a query on the entire dataset. After +running a query on this dataset, we additionally fetch metadata on +this dataset as seen here: + +=> https://github.com/genenetwork/genenetwork2/blob/70f8ed53f85cfb42ca81ed6c3b4c9cf1060940e5/wqflask/wqflask/correlation/show_corr_results.py#L88 + +This takes a long time: it's our biggest bottleneck. + +For sample correlation we call this function to fetch the data: + +=> https://github.com/genenetwork/genenetwork2/blob/70f8ed53f85cfb42ca81ed6c3b4c9cf1060940e5/wqflask/base/data_set.py#L731 + +IMO this seems to be the main issue among all queries. + +For tissue correlation we call this function to fetch the data this +doesn't take much time less than 20 seconds to create instance and +fetch results. + +=> https://github.com/genenetwork/genenetwork2/blob/70f8ed53f85cfb42ca81ed6c3b4c9cf1060940e5/wqflask/base/mrna_assay_tissue_data.py#L78> + +For lit correlation, we fetch the correlation from the DB no +computation happens + + +Assume a user selects "sample correlation" in the form with limit +2000, they will fetch the results for the entire sample dataset to +compute the sample correlation; then filter the top 2000 traits. Fetch +the tissue input for them then do the correlation then fetch lit +results for them. + +ATM, we know that our datasets are immutable unless @Acenteno updates +things. So why don't we just cache the results of such queries in +Redis, or in some json file. And use those instead of running the +query on every computation? A file look-up or a Redis look-up would be +much faster than what we already have. + +Also, another thing that could be improved on is replacing some basic +data-structures used during the computations with more efficient +ones. As an example, it makes little sense to use a list that holds a +huge number of elements, when we could use a generator instead, or +depending on the application, a more appropriate structure. That could +shave some more seconds. + +Something else worth mentioning is that the fast correlations that +used parallelisation produced bugs in gn2 could be re-written in a +more reliable way using threads-- that's what IIRC what gn1 did. So +that's something worth exploring too. + +WRT the UI crashing, we rely too much on Javascript +(DataTables). AFAICT, the massive results we get from the correlations +are sent to DataTables to process. That's asking too much! We +brainstormed on some high level ideas on how to do this. One of them +being to have the results stored somewhere. And to build pagination +off those results. Now that's up to Alex to decide how to go about it. + +Something cool that Alex pointed is an interesting "manual" testing +mechanism which he can feel free to try out: Separate the actual +"computation" and the "pre-fetching" in code. And see what takes +time. |