-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 441
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
Forwarding the LanguageWorkerOptions from the host to the job host scope and ensuring we use the provided instances. #10369
base: dev
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from 7 commits
af614bb
bfbfe56
a1257e7
eec5806
706dc1f
624a870
1b8cff0
219cdf2
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,28 @@ | ||
// Copyright (c) .NET Foundation. All rights reserved. | ||
// Licensed under the MIT License. See License.txt in the project root for license information. | ||
|
||
using System; | ||
using System.Threading; | ||
using Microsoft.Extensions.Options; | ||
using Microsoft.Extensions.Primitives; | ||
|
||
namespace Microsoft.Azure.WebJobs.Script.WebHost.Configuration | ||
{ | ||
public sealed class HostBuiltChangeTokenSource<TOptions> : IOptionsChangeTokenSource<TOptions>, IDisposable | ||
{ | ||
private CancellationTokenSource _cts = new(); | ||
|
||
public string Name => Options.DefaultName; | ||
|
||
public IChangeToken GetChangeToken() => new CancellationChangeToken(_cts.Token); | ||
|
||
public void TriggerChange() | ||
{ | ||
var previousCts = Interlocked.Exchange(ref _cts, new CancellationTokenSource()); | ||
previousCts.Cancel(); | ||
previousCts.Dispose(); | ||
} | ||
|
||
public void Dispose() => _cts.Dispose(); | ||
} | ||
} |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -3,9 +3,11 @@ | |
|
||
using System; | ||
using System.Collections.Generic; | ||
using System.Diagnostics; | ||
using Microsoft.Azure.WebJobs.Script.Diagnostics; | ||
using Microsoft.Azure.WebJobs.Script.Workers.Profiles; | ||
using Microsoft.Extensions.Configuration; | ||
using Microsoft.Extensions.DependencyInjection; | ||
using Microsoft.Extensions.Logging; | ||
using Microsoft.Extensions.Options; | ||
|
||
|
@@ -18,18 +20,21 @@ internal class LanguageWorkerOptionsSetup : IConfigureOptions<LanguageWorkerOpti | |
private readonly IEnvironment _environment; | ||
private readonly IMetricsLogger _metricsLogger; | ||
private readonly IWorkerProfileManager _workerProfileManager; | ||
private readonly IScriptHostManager _scriptHostManager; | ||
|
||
public LanguageWorkerOptionsSetup(IConfiguration configuration, | ||
ILoggerFactory loggerFactory, | ||
IEnvironment environment, | ||
IMetricsLogger metricsLogger, | ||
IWorkerProfileManager workerProfileManager) | ||
IWorkerProfileManager workerProfileManager, | ||
IScriptHostManager scriptHostManager) | ||
{ | ||
if (loggerFactory is null) | ||
{ | ||
throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(loggerFactory)); | ||
} | ||
|
||
_scriptHostManager = scriptHostManager ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(scriptHostManager)); | ||
_configuration = configuration ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(configuration)); | ||
_environment = environment ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(environment)); | ||
_metricsLogger = metricsLogger ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(metricsLogger)); | ||
|
@@ -42,18 +47,53 @@ public void Configure(LanguageWorkerOptions options) | |
{ | ||
string workerRuntime = _environment.GetEnvironmentVariable(RpcWorkerConstants.FunctionWorkerRuntimeSettingName); | ||
|
||
// Parsing worker.config.json should always be done in case of multi language worker | ||
// Parsing worker.latestConfiguration.json should always be done in case of multi language worker | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Is There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is looking like an accidental change to me. I don't expect a different file name. |
||
if (!string.IsNullOrEmpty(workerRuntime) && | ||
workerRuntime.Equals(RpcWorkerConstants.DotNetLanguageWorkerName, StringComparison.OrdinalIgnoreCase) && | ||
!_environment.IsMultiLanguageRuntimeEnvironment()) | ||
{ | ||
// Skip parsing worker.config.json files for dotnet in-proc apps | ||
// Skip parsing worker.latestConfiguration.json files for dotnet in-proc apps | ||
options.WorkerConfigs = new List<RpcWorkerConfig>(); | ||
return; | ||
} | ||
|
||
var configFactory = new RpcWorkerConfigFactory(_configuration, _logger, SystemRuntimeInformation.Instance, _environment, _metricsLogger, _workerProfileManager); | ||
// Use the latest configuration from the ScriptHostManager if available. | ||
// After specialization, the ScriptHostManager will have the latest IConfiguration reflecting additional configuration entries added during specialization. | ||
var configuration = _configuration; | ||
if (_scriptHostManager is IServiceProvider scriptHostManagerServiceProvider) | ||
{ | ||
var latestConfiguration = scriptHostManagerServiceProvider.GetService<IConfiguration>(); | ||
if (latestConfiguration is not null) | ||
{ | ||
configuration = new ConfigurationBuilder() | ||
.AddConfiguration(_configuration) | ||
.AddConfiguration(latestConfiguration) | ||
.Build(); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
var configFactory = new RpcWorkerConfigFactory(configuration, _logger, SystemRuntimeInformation.Instance, _environment, _metricsLogger, _workerProfileManager); | ||
options.WorkerConfigs = configFactory.GetConfigs(); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
|
||
internal class JobHostLanguageWorkerOptionsSetup : IPostConfigureOptions<LanguageWorkerOptions> | ||
{ | ||
private readonly ILoggerFactory _loggerFactory; | ||
|
||
public JobHostLanguageWorkerOptionsSetup(ILoggerFactory loggerFactory) | ||
{ | ||
_loggerFactory = loggerFactory; | ||
} | ||
|
||
public void PostConfigure(string name, LanguageWorkerOptions options) | ||
{ | ||
var message = $"Call to configure {nameof(LanguageWorkerOptions)} from the JobHost scope. " + | ||
$"If using {nameof(IOptions<LanguageWorkerOptions>)}, please use {nameof(IOptionsMonitor<LanguageWorkerOptions>)} instead."; | ||
Debug.Fail(message); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Can you explain the intention behind this? The comment says to use There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. The message is a bit confusing, but with the forwarding, no setups should run for There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Ah, can we clarify that?
|
||
|
||
var logger = _loggerFactory.CreateLogger("Host.LanguageWorkerConfig"); | ||
logger.LogInformation(message); | ||
} | ||
} | ||
} |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -44,6 +44,7 @@ public WebHostRpcWorkerChannelManager(IScriptEventManager eventManager, | |
IMetricsLogger metricsLogger, | ||
IConfiguration config, | ||
IWorkerProfileManager workerProfileManager, | ||
IOptionsMonitor<LanguageWorkerOptions> languageWorkerOptions, | ||
IOptions<FunctionsHostingConfigOptions> hostingConfigOptions) | ||
{ | ||
_environment = environment ?? throw new ArgumentNullException(nameof(environment)); | ||
|
@@ -57,6 +58,16 @@ public WebHostRpcWorkerChannelManager(IScriptEventManager eventManager, | |
_applicationHostOptions = applicationHostOptions; | ||
_hostingConfigOptions = hostingConfigOptions; | ||
|
||
languageWorkerOptions.OnChange(async languageWorkerOptions => | ||
{ | ||
IRpcWorkerChannel rpcWorkerChannel = await GetChannelAsync(_workerRuntime); | ||
if (rpcWorkerChannel != null && !UsePlaceholderChannel(rpcWorkerChannel)) | ||
{ | ||
_logger.LogInformation("Language worker options changed, and the placeholder worker channel is invalid for other reasons. Shutting down the channel."); | ||
await ShutdownChannelIfExistsAsync(_workerRuntime, rpcWorkerChannel.Id); | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. What's the scenario here, and why didn't we have this behavior before? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Will need to review this to comment. That's part of a set of changes pushed by @kshyju . Changes to the signal used to reload At the very least, the message needs to be a bit more descriptive. |
||
} | ||
}); | ||
|
||
_shutdownStandbyWorkerChannels = ScheduleShutdownStandbyChannels; | ||
_shutdownStandbyWorkerChannels = _shutdownStandbyWorkerChannels.Debounce(milliseconds: 5000); | ||
} | ||
|
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.
I am slightly concerned about how this will work in practice. There are subtleties to the way options are registered and calculated. I would feel better if we did the following:
Could even lift this to an extension method
IServiceCollection ForwardOptionsFrom<TOptions>(this IServiceCollection, IServiceProvider source);
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 you expand on the concerns? I like the idea of wrapping that into an extension to make this cleaner and reusable (this is applied to other options). But for the functionality, in this case, we are explicitly trying to avoid another cache miss when using
IOptions<T>
, forLanguageWorkerOptions
specifically, given the cost of running its setup today and the state it tracks (those instances would be identical).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.
Also, one thing to note is that using the suggested pattern will defer execution of the setup to the time services in the child container request the options, if nothing at the host scope consumes one of those option types.
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.
That was intentional. I wanted to ensure
IOptions
in both parent and child container would be the same values. Otherwise, the two containers could potentially have different values if config changes between the two. Unlikely, but that would be one confusing bug if it ever happens.Would this cache miss not already exist in the parent container?
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.
With the pattern currently used in the code, the values would be the same, also refreshed when using
IOptionsMonitor
, one of the differences is that when usingIOptions<T>
, you'd end up with the same instance that is returned byIOptionsMonitor<T>
(at the initial construction here), but that's intentional.Right now, there are two cache misses in the JobHost/ScriptHost scope with every single initialization:
IOptionsMonitor<LanguageWorkerOptions>
IOptions<LanguageWorkerOptions>
If no WebHost services are using
IOptions<LanguageWorkerOptions>
(or if that ever changes in the future as a result of changes to WebHost scoped services), we'd end up with a cache miss when initializing the JobHost, which would have an impact on cold start in some cases (specialization flows shouldn't be as impacted as the expectation is that placeholders would have forced this to happen).The
IOptions<LanguageWorkerOptions>
is the second hit we're trying to avoid.For the WebHost, in specialization cases, even if the host has services consuming
IOptions<LanguageWorkerOptions>
, those wouldn't impact customer cold start as they would happen in placeholders.Ultimately, much of what we're dealing with here is the fact the this current setup implementation is doing way too much and that logic should be refactored into a separate, singleton, service that is reused, avoiding the duplicate execution of that expensive logic that is not expected to run more than once anyway.
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 WebHost won't ever be realizing
IOptions<LanguageWorkerOptions>
when we have a customer payload? If that is the case, then I am fine with the approach as is.