-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 84
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.
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
Speed improvements in manifest writing/deployment #435
Comments
I think the best thing we could do here is switch to using |
Thanks. I agree that renv feels like the right direction for a proper fix/improvement. However, I 'm assuming that renv integration is going to take a little longer to achieve, so was wondering if there are other measures I can take (like the PR above) to make things better in the short term for my complaining users. |
You're correct. I took a quick look at your PR, and given that it doesn't change the default behavior I'm happy to take it. Thanks! I think the main caveat is that users who take advantage of this feature may have to explicitly list their recursive package dependencies in addition to their top-level dependencies, though (e.g. in a file |
@slodge - With rstudio/packrat#615, packrat does a much better job at avoiding repeatedly processing the same package dependency. Are you able to test performance against the latest GitHub version of packrat? |
I did a quick test on a sample app in our Azure Devops CI pipeline:
A build/deployment yesterday included
2021-01-26 16:47:24: Writing manifest for dir apps/ForecastDashboard with primary:
2021-01-26 16:48:46: Writing manifest complete
The same build today with packrat head is....
2021-01-27 17:48:47: Writing manifest for dir apps/ForecastDashboard with primary:
2021-01-27 17:48:53: Writing manifest complete
So - 82 seconds down to 6
The app deployed fine (and runs)
The deployment is against RStudio Connect(1.8.0.4-21)
I'll do some more testing tomorrow - I need to do a little fiddling to
quickly update all our build pipelines to the same packrat version. All our
apps are similar - shiny+tidyverse+internal packages - so I'd expect them
to be similar in performance. - but I'll see if I can spot any anomalies.
Thanks!
Stuart
|
More experiments today. Similar sort of scale of results No functional change observed. These builds are done within "clean" Docker container images so feel quite a solid platform. |
In our environment we're experiencing a lot of user complaints about how slow RStudio Connect is.
Their current issues mainly seem to be linke with "deployment time" - which I think is mainly down to packrat.
We've made some investigations locally and I've made one suggestion for packrat - see rstudio/packrat#603
I'd also be interested in seeing #404 - as this might help us improve deployment times too.
Are there other things we can try in order to improve performance?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: