Make js-libp2p-secio faster so that js-ipfs is faster 🚀

[daviddias]

I've expanded secio's benchmarks -- https://github.com/libp2p/js-libp2p-secio/blob/master/benchmarks/send.js --. The results (on my machine) are:

» npm run benchmark

> libp2p-secio@0.9.0 benchmark /Users/imp/code/js-libp2p-secio
> node benchmarks/send.js

create peers for test x 782 ops/sec ±1.72% (77 runs sampled)
establish an encrypted channel x 130 ops/sec ±1.83% (75 runs sampled)
send plaintext 10 x 262144 bytes x 2,529 ops/sec ±2.02% (34 runs sampled)
send encrypted 10 x 262144 bytes x 33.95 ops/sec ±1.76% (79 runs sampled)
send plaintext 100 x 262144 bytes x 309 ops/sec ±1.56% (18 runs sampled)
send encrypted 100 x 262144 bytes x 4.29 ops/sec ±1.64% (25 runs sampled)
send plaintext 1000 x 262144 bytes x 31.03 ops/sec ±1.68% (71 runs sampled)
send encrypted 1000 x 262144 bytes x 0.42 ops/sec ±3.56% (7 runs sampled)

secio is currently one of the areas that consume most memory and time during the execution of a js-ipfs node. Getting a performance boost in this module (or libp2p-crypto) will bring a significant boost to js-ipfs as well.

[dignifiedquire]

@diasdavid in your experience is this more of an issue in node.js or browser land, or similar?

[pgte]

Perhaps you'd like to capture some flamegraphs? If so, you could try running it through 0x.

[mkg20001]

I did some benchmarks

master (my machine):

create peers for test x 303 ops/sec ±22.23% (74 runs sampled)
establish an encrypted channel x 103 ops/sec ±1.26% (77 runs sampled)
send plaintext 10 x 262144 bytes x 3,575 ops/sec ±2.81% (71 runs sampled)
send encrypted 10 x 262144 bytes x 27.70 ops/sec ±1.87% (65 runs sampled)
send plaintext 100 x 262144 bytes x 482 ops/sec ±3.55% (46 runs sampled)
send encrypted 100 x 262144 bytes x 4.05 ops/sec ±1.95% (24 runs sampled)
send plaintext 1000 x 262144 bytes x 49.43 ops/sec ±1.83% (75 runs sampled)
send encrypted 1000 x 262144 bytes x 0.45 ops/sec ±1.36% (7 runs sampled)

async/await & async iterators (my machine):

🥁 drumroll

create peers for test x 4,966 ops/sec ±2.52% (61 runs sampled)
establish an encrypted channel x 6,196 ops/sec ±4.04% (74 runs sampled)
send plaintext 10 x 262144 bytes x 21,165 ops/sec ±1.96% (77 runs sampled)
send encrypted 10 x 262144 bytes x 6,195 ops/sec ±3.47% (72 runs sampled)
send plaintext 100 x 262144 bytes x 21,107 ops/sec ±28.60% (5 runs sampled)
send encrypted 100 x 262144 bytes x 6,268 ops/sec ±3.02% (76 runs sampled)

[mkg20001]

Seems like this problem should magically go away once we use async iterators

[daviddias]

Readable Streams have been indeed historically slow.

@mkg20001 make sure to run tests all the way to ipfs/interop to not miss anything

[alanshaw]

send encrypted 100 x 262144 bytes

...from 4/sec to 6,000/sec? No way...I don't believe it.

[mkg20001]

...from 4/sec to 6,000/sec? No way...I don't believe it.

There could be some trouble with the way benchmark.js handles async testing, as it will often launch stuff in parallel.

Maybe v8 applies too much magic and skews the results.

Maybe async overload also skews some timeouts.

Or... maybe it's really that fast

We'll see once it's in master. But faster it is, that's for sure! 🎉

[daviddias]

@mkg20001 have you npm link'ed this new version into js-ipfs to run its tests and also run the ipfs/interop tests?

[jacobheun]

@mkg20001 have you npm link'ed this new version into js-ipfs to run its tests and also run the ipfs/interop tests?

That won't be able to happen until we start getting libp2p integrated into js-ipfs. The async changes will need to be incorporated before we can do the full interop tests, as the interfaces have changed.

[daviddias]

That's scary. Is there a way that js-libp2p is testing itself against the other implementations that we can safely rely on (e.g. that would replace the need to run the interop tests)?

[jacobheun]

We have interop tests for js and go libp2p that we will be running earlier, https://github.com/libp2p/interop. We'll mitigate any risk and test things thoroughly before we go live, including running the full gambit of tests for ipfs.