When you fork, or start multiple workers using something like Cluster:
Are multiple threads or instances of Node process being created ? Does this breaks Node's single thread concept?
How are the request handled between workers? Does Cluster provides some intelligent mechanism to load balance all requests to multiple workers ?
Cluster uses fork, and yes, it gets balanced automatically:
The worker processes are spawned using the child_process.fork method, so that they can communicate with the parent via IPC and pass server handles back and forth.
[...]
When multiple processes are all accept()ing on the same underlying resource, the operating system load-balances across them very efficiently. There is no routing logic in Node.js, or in your program, and no shared state between the workers. Therefore, it is important to design your program such that it does not rely too heavily on in-memory data objects for things like sessions and login.
You might think that this breaks node.js single thread concept if you count a new node.js instance as another thread, however, keep in mind that all callbacks to a given request are going to be handled be the same node.js instance that accepted the original request. There are no race conditions, no shared data, only fairly safe interprocess communication.
See the Cluster documentation for more information.
Cluster was made developed to compensate of node.js's single thread architecture. Modern processors have multiple cores and a single threaded process will not be able to take advantage of the available cores. It does deviate from its single thread architecture, but it was never the plan to stick to it. The main concept was asynchronous, event-driven execution.
Cluster uses fork to create processes. A forked process really is its
own process with its own address space - there is nothing that the
child can do (normally) to affect its parent's or siblings address
space (unlike a thread). In addition to having all the methods in a
normal ChildProcess instance, the returned object has a communication
channel built-in. All forked processes can communicate using this
channel.
Notice the subtle difference here : it is not multi-threaded, it just forks to create new independent processes. See here Threads vs Processes in Linux to compare them. Each worker assumes single-threaded architecture like before. So it does not break node's single thread concept.
The balancing of load depends on your code itself (since each is independent) and the OS. The load is balanced equally among all forked processes and original process alike, by the OS.
But if you wish to do it differently, it is also possible. If you use master thread differently than worker, or each worker specializing different tasks(compressing/ffmpeg) you can do that.
Related
Let's assume i have a nodejs serverProgram with one api and it does some manipulations on the video file, sent via the http request.
const saveVideoFile=(req,res)=>{
processAndSaveVideoFile(); // can run for minimum of 10 minutes
res.send({status: "video is being processed"})
}
i decided to to make use of a workerThread to do this processing as my machine has 3 cores (core1,core2,core3) and there is no hyperthreading enabled here
Assume that my nodejs program is running on core1. When i fire up a single workerThread, will the workerThread run on core2/core3 or core1?
i read that workerThread is not the same as childProcess. ChildProcess will fork a new process which will facilitate the childProcess to choose from available free cores (core2 or core3).
i read that workerThread shares memory with the mainThread. Let's assume that i create 2 workerThreads (wt1,wt2). Will my nodejs program, wt1, wt2 run on the same core i.e core1 ?
Also, in nodejs we have eventloop (mainthread) and otherThreads doing the background operations i.e I/O. is it correct to assume that all of these are utilizing the resources available in a single core (core1). if this is the case, is creating and using additional workerThread's an overkill on the nodejs server?
Below is an excerpt from this blog
We can run things in parallel in Node.js. However, we need not to
create threads. The operating system and the virtual machine
collectively run the I/O in parallel and the JS code then runs in a
single thread when it is time to send the data back to the JavaScript
code.
i keep reading this same information about nodejs in many articles and video presentations. But what i do not understand is this,
The operating system and the virtual machine collectively run the I/O in parallel
How can the operating system run the I/O requests from nodejs program in parallel without using any of the childProcess or threads spawned from nodejs? if those I/O requests from nodejs program is running in parallel, does it mean that all 3 cores (core1,core2,core3) will be utilized?
There are lot of contents on nodejs, but it doesn't clear doubts related to my above questions. if you have idea on how these things actually work, please share the detail.
A worker thread in node.js is an actual OS thread running in a different instance of V8. As such, it's totally up to the operating system to decide how to allocate it among available CPU cores. If there are cores with available time, then it will not generally be run on the same core as the main nodejs thread when that thread is busy because the OS will allocate busy threads across the various cores.
But, again this is entirely up to the OS and is not something that nodejs controls and the exact strategy for which cores are used will vary by OS. But, in all modern operating systems, the design goal is that available cores are used for threads that are currently executing. Now, if there are more threads active at once than there are cores, the threads will be time-sliced and all the cores will be active.
Also, in nodejs we have eventloop (mainthread) and otherThreads doing the background operations i.e I/O. is it correct to assume that all of these are utilizing the resources available in a single core (core1). if this is the case, is creating and using additional workerThread's an overkill on the nodejs server?
No, it is not correct to assume those threads all use the same core.
A workerThread in nodejs has its own event loop. For the most part, it does not share memory. In fact, if you want to share memory, you have to very specifically allocated SharedMemory and pass that to the workerThread.
Is it overkill? Well, it depends upon what you're doing. There are very useful things to do with workerThreads and there are things that they would not be necessary for.
The operating system and the virtual machine collectively run the I/O in parallel
I/O in node.js is either asynchronous at the OS level (such as networking) or run in separate threads (such as disk I/O). That means it runs separately from the main thread in node.js that runs your Javascript and can run in parallel with it, synchronizing only at the completion of an event. "Parallel" in this case means that both make progress at the same time. If there are multiple cores, then they can truly be running at exactly the same time. If there was only one core, then the OS will timeslice between the various threads and they will be both make progress (in an interleaved fashion that will seem to be parallel, but really they are taking turns).
How can the operating system run the I/O requests from nodejs program in parallel without using any of the childProcess or threads spawned from nodejs? if those I/O requests from nodejs program is running in parallel, does it mean that all 3 cores (core1,core2,core3) will be utilized?
The OS has its own threads for managing things like a network interface or a disk interface. The job of those threads is to interface with the hardware and bring data to an appropriate application or take data from the application and send it to the hardware. These are OS-level threads that exists independent of node.js. Yes, other cores can be used by those OS-level threads. It is important to realize that many operations such as networking are inherently non-blocking. Thus, if you're waiting for some data to arrive on a network interface, you don't need to have a thread doing something the whole time.
I want to add that it appears in your questions that you've combined questions about a several different things. Mentioned in your questions are:
Worker Threads
Internal node.js threads
Operating system threads
These are all different things.
A worker thread is a new thread you can start to run specific pieces of Javascript in another thread so you can have more than one Javascript thread running at the same time. In node.js, this is done by creating a whole new instance of V8, setting up a whole new global environment and loaded modules environment and using almost entirely separate memory.
Internal node.js threads are used by node.js as part of implementing its event loop and its standard library. Specifically, disk I/O and some crypto operations are run in internal native threads and they communicate with your Javascript via events/callbacks through the event loop.
Operating system threads are threads that the OS uses to implement it's own system APIs. Since the OS is responsible for lots of things, these threads ca have many different uses. Depending upon native implementations, they may be used to facilitate things like disk I/O or networking I/O. These threads are the responsibility of the OS to create and use and are not directly controlled by node.js.
Some additional questions asked in comments:
what is the difference b/w workerThread & childProcess concept in nodejs? is childProcess = workerThread without sharedMemory ?
A child process can be any type of program - it does not have to be a node.js program. A worker thread is node.js code.
A worker thread can share memory if sharedMemory is specifically allocated and shared with the worker thread and if it is carefully managed for concurrency issues.
It is more efficient to copy memory back and forth between worker thread and main thread than with child process.
If main program exits, worker threads will exit. If main program exits, child process can be configured to exit or to continue.
If worker thread calls process.exit(), the main thread will exit too. If child program exits, it cannot cause main program to exit without main program's cooperation.
how nodejs is able to magically interact with the os level thread without nodejs itself creating any threads?, i need additional details on this, your explanation is the common one present in most places including the blog i shared?
nodejs just calls an OS API. It's the OS API that manages communicating with its own threads (if threads are needed for that specific OS API). How it does that communication internally is implementation dependent and will vary by OS. It will even vary by OS which OS APIs use threads and which don't.
I have been reading about multi-processing on NodeJS to get the best understanding and try to get a good performance in heavy environments with my code.
Although I understand the basic purpose and concept for the different ways to take profit of the resources to handle the load, some questions arise as I go deeper and it seems I can't find the particular answers in the documentation.
NodeJS in a single thread:
NodeJS runs a single thread that we call event loop, despite in background OS and Libuv are handling the default worker pool for I/O asynchronous tasks.
We are supossed to use a single core for the event-loop, despite the workers might be using different cores. I guess they are sorted in the end by OS scheduler.
NodeJS as multi-threaded:
When using "worker_threads" library, in the same single process, different instances of v8/Libuv are running for each thread. Thus, they share the same context and communicate among threads with "message port" and the rest of the API.
Each worker thread runs its Event loop thread. Threads are supposed to be wisely balanced among CPU cores, improving the performance. I guess they are sorted in the end by OS scheduler.
Question 1: When a worker uses I/O default worker pool, are the very same
threads as other workers' pool being shared somehow? or each worker has its
own default worker pool?
NodeJS in multi-processing:
When using "cluster" library, we are splitting the work among different processes. Each process is set on a different core to balance the load... well, the main event loop is what in the end is set in a different core, so it doesn't share core with another heavy event loop. Sounds smart to do it that way.
Here I would communicate with some IPC tactic.
Question 2: And the default worker pool for this NodeJS process? where
are they? balanced among the rest of cores as expected in the first
case? Then they might be on the same cores as the other worker pools
of the cluster I guess. Shouldn't it be better to say that we are balancing main threads (event loops) rather than "the process"?
Being all this said, the main question:
Question 3: Whether is better using clustering or worker_threads? If both are being used in the same code, how can both libraries agree the best performance? or they
just can simply get in conflict? or at the end is the OS who takes
control?
Each worker thread has its own main loop (libuv etc). So does each cloned Node.js process when you use clustering.
Clustering is a way to load-balance incoming requests to your Node.js server over several copies of that server.
Worker threads are a way for a single Node.js process to offload long-running functions to a separate thread, to avoid blocking its own main loop.
Which is better? It depends on the problem you're solving. Worker threads are for long-running functions. Clustering makes a server able to handle more requests, by handling them in parallel. You can use both if you need to: have each Node.js cluster process use a worker thread for long-running functions.
As a first approximation for your decision-making: only use worker threads when you know you have long-running functions.
The node processes (whether from clustering or worker threads) don't get tied to specific cores (or Intel processor threads) on the host machine; the host's OS scheduling assigns cores as needed. The host OS scheduler minimize context-switch overhead when assigning cores to runnable processes. If you have too many active Javascript instances (cluster instances + worker threads) the host OS will give them timeslices according to its scheduling algorithms. Other than avoiding too many Javascript instances, there's very little point in trying second-guess the OS scheduler.
Edit Each Node.js instance, with any worker threads, uses a single libuv thread pool. A main Node.js process shares a single libuv thread pool with all its worker threads. If your Node.js program uses many worker threads, you may, or may not, need to set the UV_THREADPOOL_SIZE environment variable to a value greater than the default 4.
Node.js's cluster functionality uses the underlying OS's fork/exec scheme to create a new OS process for each cluster instance. So, each cluster instance has its own libuv pool.
If you're running stuff at scale, lets say with more than ten host machines running your Node.js server, then you can spend time optimizing Javascript instances.
Don't forget nginx if you use it as a reverse proxy to handle your https work. It needs some processor time too, but it uses fine-grain multithreading so you won't have to worry about it unless you have huge traffic.
If I use async functions, or functions with callbacks like the native fs module, http etc, will they run by default across all cpu cores?
Or the entire thing will just use 1 core?
Some asynchronous operations in node.js (such as file I/O in the fs module) will use additional threads within the node.js process via a thread pool in libuv. It would depend upon the size of your thread pool and what types of operations and upon your host OS for how many additional CPUs will be engaged. It does not necessarily help overall throughput to engage many CPUs on file I/O that is all going through the same disk since reading/writing is often bottlenecked by the position of the read/write head on the disk anyway.
Some asynchronous operations such as networking (like the http module) are non-blocking and asynchronous by nature and do not do their networking with threads or trigger any meaningful use of additional CPUs.
None of this will run your own Javascript in multiple threads since Javascript itself all executes in one thread.
To fully engage multiple CPUs, you can:
Put some of your own Javascript into the new nodejs Worker Threads and communicate back to the main node.js thread via messaging.
Fire up your own node.js child processes to do work in those child processes and communicate back results using one of the many interprocess communications options.
Use node.js clustering so that incoming requests can be split among available queues. This requires making sure any server state is shareable among all the clustered processes (typically stored in some database that all processes can access). This will allow separate requests to use separate CPUs - it won't help a single request use more CPUs. You would need to use #1 and/or #2 for that.
Did I understand correctly: If I use cluster package, does it mean that
a new node instance is created for each created worker?
What is the difference between cluster and worker_threads packages?
Effectively what you are differing is process based vs thread based. Threads share memory (e.g. SharedArrayBuffer) whereas processes don't. Essentially they are the same thing categorically.
cluster
One process is launched on each CPU and can communicate via IPC.
Each process has it's own memory with it's own Node (v8) instance. Creating tons of them may create memory issues.
Great for spawning many HTTP servers that share the same port b/c the master main process will multiplex the requests to the child processes.
worker threads
One process total
Creates multiple threads with each thread having one Node instance (one event loop, one JS engine). Most Node API's are available to each thread except a few. So essentially Node is embedding itself and creating a new thread.
Shares memory with other threads (e.g. SharedArrayBuffer)
Great for CPU intensive tasks like processing data or accessing the file system. Because NodeJS is single threaded, synchronous tasks can be made more efficient with workers
I'm a little confused with multithreading and asynchronous in js. What is the difference between a cluster, a stream, a child process, and a worker thread?
The first thing to remember about multithreading in Node.js is that in user-space, there exists no concept of threading, and as such you cannot write any code making use of threads. Any node program is always a single threaded program (in user-space).
Since a node program is a single thread, and runs as a single process, it uses only a single CPU. Most modern processors have multiple CPUs, and in order to make use of all of these CPUs and provide better throughput, you can start the same node program as a cluster.
The cluster module of node, allows you to start a node program, and the first instance launched is launched as the master instance. The master allows you to spawn new workers as separate processes (not threads) using cluster.fork() method. The actual work that is to be done by the node program is done by the workers. The example in the node docs demonstrates this perfectly.
A child process is a process that is spawned from the current process and has an established IPC channel between them to communicate with each other. The master and workers I described in cluster are an example of child processes. the child_process module in node allows you to spawn custom child processes as you require.
Streams are something that is not at all related to multi-threading or multiple processes. Streams are just a way to handle large amounts of data without loading all the data into the working memory at the same time. Ex: Consider you want to read a 10GB log file, and your server only has 4GB of memory. Trying to load the file using fs.readFile will crash your process. Instead you use fs.createReadStream and use that to process the file in smaller chunks that can be loaded into memory.
Hope this explains. For further details you really should read the node docs.
this is a little vague so I'm just gonna give an overview.
Streams are really just data streams like in any other language. Similar to iostreams in C and where you get user input, or other types of data. They're usually masked by another class so you don't know you're using a stream. You won't mess with these unless you're building a new type usually.
Child processes, worker threads, and clusters are all ways of utilizing multi-core processing in Node applications.
Worker threads are basic multithreading the Node way, with each thread having a way to communicate with the parent, and shared memory possible between each thread. You pass in a function and data, and can provide a callback for when the thread is done processing.
Clusters are more for network sharing. Often used behind a master listener port, a master app will listen for connections, then assign them in a round-robin manner to each cluster thread for use. They share the server port(s) across multiple processors to even out the load.
Child processes are a way to create a new process in a similar way to through popen. These can be asynchronous or synchronous (non-blocking or blocking the Node event loop), and can send to and receive from the parent process via stdout/stderr and stdin, respectively. The parent can register listeners to each child process for updates. You can pass a file, a function, or a module to a child process. Generally do not share memory.
I'd suggest reading the documentation yourself and coming back with any specific questions you have, you won't get much with vague questions like this, makes it seem like you didn't do your own part of the work beforehand.
Documentation:
Streams
Worker Threads
Clusters
Child Processes