Skip to content

common : throttle download progress output to reduce IO flush #17427

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 30, 2025
+13 −6
Merged

common : throttle download progress output to reduce IO flush #17427

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
19 changes: 13 additions & 6 deletions common/download.cpp
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -517,36 +517,43 @@ static bool common_pull_file(httplib::Client & cli,
headers.emplace("Range", "bytes=" + std::to_string(existing_size) + "-");
}

std::atomic<size_t> downloaded{existing_size};
const char * func = __func__; // avoid __func__ inside a lambda
size_t downloaded = existing_size;
Copy link
Member

@ggerganov ggerganov Nov 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any reason that this was std::atomic<size_t> before?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@angt angt Nov 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I have no idea, maybe to be safer than needed. I noticed it was useless when adding progress_step.

Copy link
Collaborator

@ngxson ngxson Nov 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think this is OK to merge if you confirm that the atomic was not important here.

We can re-implement it once we move the progress tracking to a higher scope though (i.e. shared among threads). This will be important once we implement the model download function in llama-server

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@angt angt Nov 30, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes absolutely useless

size_t progress_step = 0;

auto res = cli.Get(resolve_path, headers,
[&](const httplib::Response &response) {
if (existing_size > 0 && response.status != 206) {
LOG_WRN("%s: server did not respond with 206 Partial Content for a resume request. Status: %d\n", __func__, response.status);
LOG_WRN("%s: server did not respond with 206 Partial Content for a resume request. Status: %d\n", func, response.status);
return false;
}
if (existing_size == 0 && response.status != 200) {
LOG_WRN("%s: download received non-successful status code: %d\n", __func__, response.status);
LOG_WRN("%s: download received non-successful status code: %d\n", func, response.status);
return false;
}
if (total_size == 0 && response.has_header("Content-Length")) {
try {
size_t content_length = std::stoull(response.get_header_value("Content-Length"));
total_size = existing_size + content_length;
} catch (const std::exception &e) {
LOG_WRN("%s: invalid Content-Length header: %s\n", __func__, e.what());
LOG_WRN("%s: invalid Content-Length header: %s\n", func, e.what());
}
}
return true;
},
[&](const char *data, size_t len) {
ofs.write(data, len);
if (!ofs) {
LOG_ERR("%s: error writing to file: %s\n", __func__, path_tmp.c_str());
LOG_ERR("%s: error writing to file: %s\n", func, path_tmp.c_str());
return false;
}
downloaded += len;
print_progress(downloaded, total_size);
progress_step += len;

if (progress_step >= total_size / 1000 || downloaded == total_size) {
print_progress(downloaded, total_size);
progress_step = 0;
}
return true;
},
nullptr
Expand Down
Loading