59 lines
2.7 KiB
Markdown
59 lines
2.7 KiB
Markdown
|
# Progress Log
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Current Stage: Phase 1 — Research + First Improvement Cycle
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Status: Cycle 1 COMPLETE
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Plan Overview
|
||
|
|
1. **Phase 0**: Codebase audit — understand current swactor architecture, existing tests, benchmarks ✅
|
||
|
|
2. **Phase 1**: Broad survey + interleaved improvements
|
||
|
|
3. **Phase 2**: Deeper improvements based on findings
|
||
|
|
4. **Phase 3**: Testing methodology improvements
|
||
|
|
5. **Phase 4**: Final evaluation & documentation
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Completed This Session
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Cycle 1: Fairness (Message Budget)
|
||
|
|
- **Research**: Studied ractor, tokio, Erlang/OTP BEAM, Linux CFS/EEVDF, libuv
|
||
|
|
- **Finding**: `tick_all` drained ENTIRE mailbox per actor per tick — critical fairness bug
|
||
|
|
- BEAM uses 4000 reduction budget, tokio uses 128-op cooperative budget
|
||
|
|
- Swactor had zero budget — one hot actor could starve all others on same worker
|
||
|
|
- **Implementation**: Added `actor_message_budget` to `RuntimeConfig` (default: 64)
|
||
|
|
- Modified `tick_all` to break after `budget` messages per actor
|
||
|
|
- `budget=0` means unlimited (backward compatible)
|
||
|
|
- **Tests**: 3 new fairness tests (hot_actor_does_not_starve_cold_actor, unlimited_budget_drains_all, budget_messages_drain_across_multiple_ticks)
|
||
|
|
- **Benchmarks**: Added fairness benchmark group (cold_latency_under_pressure, throughput_by_budget)
|
||
|
|
- **Fixes**: Updated RuntimeConfig struct literals across crates (python, runtime-dashboard, mt_benchmarks)
|
||
|
|
- **Result**: 45 tests pass (42 original + 3 new), all workspace crates compile
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
### Research Notes
|
||
|
|
- Full analysis in `CLAUDE/notes/research_synthesis.md`
|
||
|
|
- Baseline benchmarks in `CLAUDE/notes/baseline_benchmarks.md`
|
||
|
|
- Constraints in `CLAUDE/notes/constraints.md`
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Next Steps
|
||
|
|
- [ ] **Cycle 2: Stress testing + property-based tests**
|
||
|
|
- Concurrent spawn+send stress tests
|
||
|
|
- Multi-threaded fairness validation
|
||
|
|
- Property: message ordering preserved under budget
|
||
|
|
- Property: all messages eventually delivered with budget > 0
|
||
|
|
- [ ] **Cycle 3: Adaptive backoff with thread parking**
|
||
|
|
- Replace spinning with condvar-based parking (from tokio parker design)
|
||
|
|
- Benchmark latency improvement under varying load
|
||
|
|
- [ ] **Cycle 4: Enhanced benchmarks**
|
||
|
|
- Message size sensitivity (8B, 64B, 256B, 1KB)
|
||
|
|
- Latency percentiles (p50, p99, p999)
|
||
|
|
- Many-to-one fanin contention
|
||
|
|
- Cross-worker vs same-worker delivery comparison
|
||
|
|
- [ ] **Cycle 5: Work stealing exploration**
|
||
|
|
- Evaluate feasibility of actor migration between workers
|
||
|
|
- BEAM two-tier approach: reactive steal + periodic migration
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Open Questions
|
||
|
|
- Should budget be configurable per-actor (not just per-runtime)?
|
||
|
|
- Is 64 the right default budget? Benchmarks show budget=32 slightly faster for throughput
|
||
|
|
- Thread parking: how to handle the notification mechanism without adding deps?
|
||
|
|
|
||
|
|
## Blockers
|
||
|
|
- (none)
|