When you import a file in nodejs, it's loaded, evaluated and cached.
Is it possible to free the memory for that file, if you know you will never use it again (or maybe in a long time, worth it to compile it again).
What I want to do is importing a temporal file, read its code, execute it once and then free it forever (I know it's not going to be used again, and I don't want to have memory leaks)
Basically is having dynamic code in nodejs.
Pages like codility which allows you to input code and execute in backend side, should work with a similar solution... unless they run a complete new nodejs instance with that code... and then kill it.
Is it possible? If so, how?
You can delete from the module cache like this. Just make sure that there are no circular dependencies or the module will not actually be freed from memory
delete require.cache[require.resolve('./theModuleYouWantToDelete.js')]
It depends what you mean by "free" the module. Nodejs does not have a way to remove the code once it has been run so that will always remain in memory.
If you remove all references to the module (by deleting it from the cache) and removing any other references there might be to exported data, then any data associated with the module should be eligible for garbage collection.
For a service that lets the user run arbitrary code on the server, I would always run that in a sandboxed separate process where you can kill the process and recover all resources used by the code, not run that in the main server process.
Ok, reading the NodeJS documentation about modules, it happens to exist a public cache member and it says:
Modules are cached in this object when they are required. By deleting a key value from this object, the next require will reload the module. This does not apply to native addons, for which reloading will result in an error.
Adding or replacing entries is also possible. This cache is checked before native modules and if a name matching a native module is added to the cache, no require call is going to receive the native module anymore. Use with care!
So I guess every evaluated module lives here internally, and removing a key from this object like the docs says, it will also free the related memory to that portion of code (when the garbage collector do its job)
Related
We are integrating Amazon's node.js SDK into our project and while I do not think it matters due to require's cache and the fact that everything is compiled, I could not find a site that definitively states that multiple requires will not affect performance in run time.
Obviously it depends on what files you are requiring, the contents of those files, and whether or not they could block the event loop or have other code inside of them to slow performance.
I prefer to structure code based on functionality rather than just having a 10000+ line file that does not really relate to the task at hand. I just want to make sure I'm not shooting myself in the foot by break out functionality into separate modules and then requiring on an as needed basis.
Well, require() is a synchronous operation so it should ONLY be used during server initialization, never during an actual request. Therefore, the performance of require() should only affect your server startup time, not your request handling time.
Second, require() does have a cache behind it. It matches the fully resolved path of the module you are attempting to load. So, if you call require(somePath) and a module at that same path has previously been loaded, then the module handle is just immediately returned from the cache. No module is loaded from disk a second time. The module code is not executed a second time.
Obviously it depends on what files you are requiring, the contents of those files, and whether or not they could block the event loop or have other code inside of them to slow performance.
If you are requiring a module for the first time, it WILL block the event loop while loading that module because require() uses blocking, synchronous I/O when the module is not yet cached. That's why you should be doing this at server initialization time, not during a request handler.
I prefer to structure code based on functionality rather than just having a 10000+ line file that does not really relate to the task at hand. I just want to make sure I'm not shooting myself in the foot by break out functionality into separate modules and then requiring on an as needed basis.
Breaking code into logical modules is good for ease of maintenance, ease of testing and ease of reuse, so it's definitely a good thing.
I have seen people go too far where there are so many modules each with only a few lines of code in them that it backfires and makes the project unwieldly to work on, find things in, design test suites for, etc... So, there is a balance.
Is there any to lock any object in Node JS application.
Is there are multiple instance for application is available some function shouldnt run concurrent. If instance A function is completed, it should unlock that object/key or some identifier and B instance of application should check if its unlock it should run some function.
Any Object or Key can be used for identifying the locking and unlocking the function.
How to do that in NodeJS application which have multiple instances.
As mentioned above Redis may be your answer, however, it really depends on the resources available to you. There are some other possibilities less complicated and certainly less powerful which may also do the trick.
node-cache may also do the trick, if you set it up correctly. It is not any where near as powerful as Redis, but on the bright side it does not require as much setup and interaction with your environment.
So there is Redis and node-cache for memory locks. I should mention there are quite a few NPM packages which do the cache. Depends on what you need, and how intricate your cache needs to be.
However, there are less elegant ways to do what you want, though less elegant is not necessarily worse.
You could use a JSON file based system and hold locks on the files for a TTL. lockfile or proper-lockfile will accomplish the task. You can read the information from the files when needed, delete when required, give them a TTL. Basically a cache system to disk.
The memory system is obviously faster. The file system requires just as much planning in your code as the memory system.
There is yet another way. This is possibly the most dangerous one, and you would have to think long and hard on the consequences in terms of security and need.
Node.js has its own process.env. As most know this holds the system global variables available to all by simply writing process.env.foo where foo would have been declared as a global system variable. A package such as .dotenv allows you to add to your system variables by way of a .env text file. Thus if you put in that file sam=mongoDB, then in your code where you write process.env.sam it will be interpreted as mongoDB. Tons of system wide variables can be set up here.
So what good does that do, you may ask? Well these are system wide variables, and they can be changed in mid-flight. So if you need to lock the variables and then change them it is a simple manner to do it with. Beware though of the gotcha here. Once the system goes down, or all processes stop, and is started again, your environment variables will return to the default in the .env file.
Additionally, unless you are running a system which is somewhat safe on AWS or Azure etc. I would not feel secure in having my .env file open to the world. There is a way around this one too. You can use a hash to encrypt all variables and put the hash in the file. When you call it, decrypt before actually requesting use of the full variable.
There are probably many wore ways to lock and unlock, not the least of which is to use the native Node.js structure. Combine File System events together with Crypto. But this demands a much deeper level of understanding of the actual Node.js library and structures.
Hope some of this helped.
I strongly recommend Redis in your case.
There are several ways to create a application/process shared object, using locks is one of them, as you mentioned.
But they're just complicated. Unless you really need to do that yourself, Redis will be good enough. Atomic ops cross multiple process, transaction and so on.
Old thread but I didn't want to use redis so I made my own open source solution which utilizes websocket connections:
https://github.com/OneAndonlyFinbar/sync-cache
NodeJS require function, that loads modules, has a "cache" (which is a object).
Entries is this cache are garbage collected once I'm no longer using the module? (resulting in loading from disk if used again)
I think the answer is "no", but I didn't found any references on the web
Entries is this cache are garbage collected once I'm no longer using
the module?
No. Modules loaded with require() are cached indefinitely whether you are done using them or not.
Memory for Javascript variables/objects that is used by the module is garbage collected subject to all the normal rules of garbage collection (when there is no live code that still has a reference to the variable/object). But, the module cache keeps a reference to the loaded module itself so the code or any module level variables are not garbage collected unless a module is manually removed from the cache.
Here's a link to the node.js doc on the topic.
Caching
Modules are cached after the first time they are loaded. This
means (among other things) that every call to require('foo') will get
exactly the same object returned, if it would resolve to the same
file.
If you want to manually remove a module from the cache, that is described here:
unloading code/modules
Though, this will allow all module-level variables to be garbage collected, given the way node.js is structured I don't think it will actually unload the code from memory.
I'm writing my first 'serious' Node/Express application, and I'm becoming concerned about the number of O(n) and O(n^2) operations I'm performing on every request. The application is a blog engine, which indexes and serves up articles stored in markdown format in the file system. The contents of the articles folder do not change frequently, as the app is scaled for a personal blog, but I would still like to be able to add a file to that folder whenever I want, and have the app include it without further intervention.
Operations I'm concerned about
When /index is requested, my route is iterating over all files in the directory and storing them as objects
When a "tag page" is requested (/tag/foo) I'm iterating over all the articles, and then iterating over their arrays of tags to determine which articles to present in an index format
Now, I know that this is probably premature optimisation as the performance is still satisfactory over <200 files, but definitely not lightning fast. And I also know that in production, measures like this wouldn't be considered necessary/worthwhile unless backed by significant benchmarking results. But as this is purely a learning exercise/demonstration of ability, and as I'm (perhaps excessively) concerned about learning optimal habits and patterns, I worry I'm committing some kind of sin here.
Measures I have considered
I get the impression that a database might be a more typical solution, rather than filesystem I/O. But this would mean monitoring the directory for changes and processing/adding new articles to the database, a whole separate operation/functionality. If I did this, would it make sense to be watching that folder for changes even when a request isn't coming in? Or would it be better to check the freshness of the database, then retrieve results from the database? I also don't know how much this helps ultimately, as database calls are still async/slower than internal state, aren't they? Or would a database query, e.g. articles where tags contain x be O(1) rather than O(n)? If so, that would clearly be ideal.
Also, I am beginning to learn about techniques/patterns for caching results, e.g. a property on the function containing the previous result, which could be checked for and served up without performing the operation. But I'd need to check if the folder had new files added to know if it was OK to serve up the cached version, right? But more fundamentally (and this is the essential newbie query at hand) is it considered OK to do this? Everyone talks about how node apps should be stateless, and this would amount to maintaining state, right? Once again, I'm still a fairly raw beginner, and so reading the source of mature apps isn't always as enlightening to me as I wish it was.
Also have I fundamentally misunderstood how routes work in node/express? If I store a variable in index.js, are all the variables/objects created by it destroyed when the route is done and the page is served? If so I apologise profusely for my ignorance, as that would negate basically everything discussed, and make maintaining an external database (or just continuing to redo the file I/O) the only solution.
First off, the request and response objects that are part of each request last only for the duration of a given request and are not shared by other requests. They will be garbage collected as soon as they are no longer in use.
But, module-scoped variables in any of your Express modules last for the duration of the server. So, you can load some information in one request, store it in a module-level variable and that information will still be there when the next request comes along.
Since multiple requests can be "in-flight" at the same time if you are using any async operations in your request handlers, then if you are sharing/updating information between requests you have to make sure you have atomic updates so that the data is shared safely. In node.js, this is much simpler than in a multi-threaded response handler web server, but there still can be issues if you're doing part of an update to a shared object, then doing some async operation, then doing the rest of an update to a shared object. When you do an async operation, another request could run and see the shared object.
When not doing an async operation, your Javascript code is single threaded so other requests won't interleave until you go async.
It sounds like you want to cache your parsed state into a simple in-memory Javascript structure and then intelligently update this cache of information when new articles are added.
Since you already have the code to parse your set of files and tags into in-memory Javascript variables, you can just keep that code. You will want to package that into a separate function that you can call at any time and it will return a newly updated state.
Then, you want to call it when your server starts and that will establish the initial state.
All your routes can be changed to operate on the cached state and this should speed them up tremendously.
Then, all you need is a scheme to decide when to update the cached state (e.g. when something in the file system changed). There are lots of options and which to use depends a little bit on how often things will change and how often the changes need to get reflected to the outside world. Here are some options:
You could register a file system watcher for a particular directory of your file system and when it triggers, you figure out what has changed and update your cache. You can make the update function as dumb (just start over and parse everything from scratch) or as smart (figure out what one item changed and update only that part of the cache) as it is worth doing. I'd suggest you start simple and only invest more in it when you're sure that effort is needed.
You could just manually rebuild the cache once every hour. Updates would take an average of 30 minutes to show, but this would take 10 seconds to implement.
You could create an admin function in your server to instruct the server to update its cache now. This might be combined with option 2, so that if you added new content, it would automatically show within an hour, but if you wanted it to show immediately, you could hit the admin page to tell it to update its cache.
Is there any particular reason to use memcached for fast access to cached data instead of just creating a global CACHE variable in the node program and using that?
Assume that the application will we running in one instance and not distributed across multiple machines.
The global variable option seems like it would be faster and more efficient but I wasn't sure if there was a good reason to not do this.
It depends on the size and number of items. If you're working with a few items of modest size and they don't need to be accessible to other node instances then using an object has a key/value store is fine. The one trick is that when you go to delete/remove items from the cache/object make sure you don't keep any other references to it, otherwise you will have a leak.