search

JuliaLang / juliaup

Julia installer and version multiplexer
MIT License
975 stars 82 forks source link

Directly use libjulia #327

Open davidanthoff opened 2 years ago

davidanthoff commented 2 years ago

I'm not suggesting we do this anytime soon, but eventually I think the julialauncher binary here could take the place of https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/tree/master/cli? That way we would speed up startup times.

CC @staticfloat

staticfloat commented 2 years ago

I don't think the cli piece adds much startup time. I would suggest you measure it before you try to re-implement it, it does a lot of stuff (and the stuff it does changes from version to version as we add more features)

vchuravy commented 10 months ago

It might be interesting implementing the cli piece in rust, especially if we are going to parse some TOML files to figure out which libraries to load.

fingolfin commented 8 months ago

How much potential speed gain are we talking that would make it worth to have the extra complexity (and possibility for subtle bugs due to difference between the two implementation)?

In a quick experiment, the overhead seems neglible:

tutulla:~$ hyperfine -r 25 "julia +1.10 -e 'exit()'"
Benchmark 1: julia +1.10 -e 'exit()'
  Time (mean ± σ):     103.5 ms ±   2.4 ms    [User: 161.1 ms, System: 478.4 ms]
  Range (min … max):   101.8 ms … 113.9 ms    25 runs

versus

tutulla:~$ hyperfine -r 25 "$HOME/.julia/juliaup/julia-1.10.0+0.x64.linux.gnu/bin/julia -e 'exit()'"
Benchmark 1: /users/cip/alggeom/horn/.julia/juliaup/julia-1.10.0+0.x64.linux.gnu/bin/julia -e 'exit()'
  Time (mean ± σ):     101.6 ms ±   0.9 ms    [User: 165.7 ms, System: 474.4 ms]
  Range (min … max):    99.6 ms … 102.7 ms    25 runs

Maybe my test is a bad one?

davidanthoff commented 8 months ago

I think the benefit might be a bit better on Windows? My understanding is that the overhead on Windows to launch a process is larger than on Linux/Mac?