Improve perf of CredentialCache.GetCredential #103714
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/ncl |
|
/benchmark micro aspnet-perf-lin libs --variable filter=*GetCredential_Uri |
using BenchmarkDotNet.Attributes;
using BenchmarkDotNet.Running;
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Net;
public class CredentialCacheTests
{
private const string UriPrefix = "http://name";
private const string HostPrefix = "name";
private const int Port = 80;
private const string AuthenticationType = "authType";
private static readonly NetworkCredential s_credential = new NetworkCredential();
private readonly Dictionary<(int uriCount, int hostPortCount), CredentialCache> _caches = new()
{
{ (0, 0), CreateCredentialCache(0, 0) },
{ (0, 10), CreateCredentialCache(0, 10) },
{ (10, 0), CreateCredentialCache(10, 0) },
{ (10, 10), CreateCredentialCache(10, 10) }
};
[Benchmark]
[Arguments("http://notfound", 0)]
[Arguments("http://notfound", 10)]
[Arguments("http://name5", 10)]
public NetworkCredential GetCredential_Uri(string uriString, int uriCount)
{
CredentialCache cc = _caches[(uriCount: uriCount, hostPortCount: 0)];
return cc.GetCredential(new Uri(uriString), AuthenticationType);
}
private static CredentialCache CreateCredentialCache(int uriCount, int hostPortCount)
{
var cc = new CredentialCache();
for (int i = 0; i < uriCount; i++)
{
Uri uri = new Uri(UriPrefix + i.ToString());
cc.Add(uri, AuthenticationType, s_credential);
}
for (int i = 0; i < hostPortCount; i++)
{
string host = HostPrefix + i.ToString();
cc.Add(host, Port, AuthenticationType, s_credential);
}
return cc;
}
} |
Benchmark results on Intel
|
This was referenced Jun 19, 2024
Open
|
I took a look at why we regressed the one scenario, and it seems that that particular benchmark is measuring a corner case. I locally editted the benchmarks so that the creds in the cache on the same host, but different prefix ( Since the regressed scenario is when we are querying a completely different host, I think the regression is not a big problem. |
// Licensed to the .NET Foundation under one or more agreements.
// The .NET Foundation licenses this file to you under the MIT license.
// See the LICENSE file in the project root for more information.
using BenchmarkDotNet.Attributes;
using BenchmarkDotNet.Running;
using System;
using System.Collections.Generic;
using System.Net;
public class CredentialCacheTests
{
private const string UriPrefix = "http://name/prefix";
private const string HostPrefix = "name";
private const int Port = 80;
private const string AuthenticationType = "authType";
private static readonly NetworkCredential s_credential = new NetworkCredential();
private readonly Dictionary<(int uriCount, int hostPortCount), CredentialCache> _caches =
new Dictionary<(int uriCount, int hostPortCount), CredentialCache>
{
{ (0, 0), CreateCredentialCache(0, 0) },
{ (0, 10), CreateCredentialCache(0, 10) },
{ (10, 0), CreateCredentialCache(10, 0) },
{ (10, 10), CreateCredentialCache(10, 10) }
};
[Benchmark]
[Arguments("http://notfound", 0)]
[Arguments("http://differentHost", 10)]
[Arguments("http://name/prefix5/path", 10)]
[Arguments("http://name/differentPrefix/path", 10)]
[Arguments("http://name/diff/path", 10)]
public NetworkCredential GetCredential_Uri(string uriString, int uriCount)
{
CredentialCache cc = _caches[(uriCount: uriCount, hostPortCount: 0)];
return cc.GetCredential(new Uri(uriString), AuthenticationType);
}
private static CredentialCache CreateCredentialCache(int uriCount, int hostPortCount)
{
var cc = new CredentialCache();
for (int i = 0; i < uriCount; i++)
{
Uri uri = new Uri(UriPrefix + i.ToString() + "/");
cc.Add(uri, AuthenticationType, s_credential);
}
for (int i = 0; i < hostPortCount; i++)
{
string host = HostPrefix + i.ToString();
cc.Add(host, Port, AuthenticationType, s_credential);
}
return cc;
}
} |
Benchmark results on Intel
|
|
@dotnet/ncl Can I get a review? |
This was referenced Jun 24, 2024
wfurt
approved these changes
Jun 25, 2024
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #101991.
Fixes #102281.
Not sure what introduced the original regression, but we can save some time by first checking if candidate credential can have longer prefix match before we start comparing auth schemes and uri, and we can stop early if we find exact match.