我正在尝试使用 posix_spawn 而不是fork / exec来获得一些性能提升。我当前的项目是用Python编写的，所以我使用了this Python绑定。我也尝试了一些分叉，之后我在Cython中编写了自己的posix_spawn绑定（以摆脱一些依赖），但获得了几乎相同的结果。
当我只需要在不捕获stdout / stderr的情况下运行进程时，确实有显着的加速。但是当我确实需要它时（对于我的项目来说是必要的）， posix_spawn 调用变得和fork / exec调用一样慢。而且，它取决于分配的内存量，与fork / exec相同。即使进程实际上没有产生任何输出，它也会发生 - 我检查了/ bin / true。我仍然无法解释这种行为。对于fork / exec（通过子进程模块），只要输出不是太大，我们是否读取进程输出没有显着差异。
这是我的测试脚本（省略了导入和分析代码）
# test.py
def spawn_no_out(args):
command = args[0]
pid = posix_spawn(command, args)
status, rusage = exits(pid)
def spawn(args):
# Prepare pipes to capture stdout and stderr
stdout_read, stdout_write = os.pipe()
stderr_read, stderr_write = os.pipe()
fa = FileActions()
fa.add_dup2(stdout_write, 1)
fa.add_close(stdout_read)
fa.add_dup2(stderr_write, 2)
fa.add_close(stderr_read)
# Spawn the process
command = args[0]
pid = posix_spawn(command, args, file_actions=fa)
# Read and close file descriptors
os.close(stdout_write)
os.close(stderr_write)
status, rusage = exits(pid)
out = os.fdopen(stdout_read)
err = os.fdopen(stderr_read)
return out, err
def fork(args):
return Popen(args, stdout=PIPE, stderr=PIPE).communicate()
def fork_no_out(args):
return subprocess.call(args)
def run_benchmark(func, args, count):
for _ in xrange(count):
func(args)
print "%s: %ds" % (func.__name__, time.time() - start)
def main():
# Reads from stdout the number of process spawns and size of allocated memory
args = ["/bin/true"]
count = int(sys.argv[1]) if len(sys.argv) > 1 else 1000
mem_size = int(sys.argv[2]) if len(sys.argv) > 2 else 10000000
some_allocated_memory = range(mem_size)
for func in [spawn, spawn_no_out, fork, fork_no_out]:
run_benchmark(func, args, count)
if __name__ == "__main__":
main()
测试输出而不分配额外的内存：
./test.py 10000 1
spawn: 34s
3754834 function calls (3754776 primitive calls) in 33.517 seconds
Ordered by: internal time, cumulative time
List reduced from 144 to 5 due to restriction
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
10000 15.475 0.002 15.475 0.002 {posix.wait4}
10000 5.850 0.001 5.850 0.001 {_cffi__x2c5d2681xf492c09f.posix_spawn}
10000 3.217 0.000 12.750 0.001 /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/posix_spawn-0.1-py2.7.egg/posix_spawn/_impl.py:75(posix_spawn)
10000 2.242 0.000 33.280 0.003 ./test.py:23(spawn)
660000 1.777 0.000 3.159 0.000 /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/cffi/api.py:212(new)
spawn_no_out: 14s
3340013 function calls in 14.631 seconds
Ordered by: internal time, cumulative time
List reduced from 25 to 5 due to restriction
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
10000 7.466 0.001 7.466 0.001 {posix.wait4}
10000 2.012 0.000 2.012 0.000 {_cffi__x2c5d2681xf492c09f.posix_spawn}
10000 1.658 0.000 6.994 0.001 /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/posix_spawn-0.1-py2.7.egg/posix_spawn/_impl.py:75(posix_spawn)
650000 1.640 0.000 2.919 0.000 /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/cffi/api.py:212(new)
650000 0.496 0.000 0.496 0.000 {_cffi_backend.newp}
fork: 40s
840094 function calls in 40.745 seconds
Ordered by: internal time, cumulative time
List reduced from 53 to 5 due to restriction
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
10000 19.460 0.002 19.460 0.002 {posix.read}
10000 6.505 0.001 6.505 0.001 {posix.fork}
10081 4.667 0.000 4.667 0.000 {built-in method poll}
10000 2.773 0.000 30.190 0.003 /usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py:1187(_execute_child)
10000 0.814 0.000 32.996 0.003 /usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py:650(__init__)
fork_no_out: 38s
330013 function calls in 38.488 seconds
Ordered by: internal time, cumulative time
List reduced from 36 to 5 due to restriction
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
10000 18.179 0.002 18.179 0.002 {posix.read}
10000 6.904 0.001 6.904 0.001 {posix.waitpid}
10000 6.613 0.001 6.613 0.001 {posix.fork}
10000 2.633 0.000 28.976 0.003 /usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py:1187(_execute_child)
10000 0.880 0.000 30.070 0.003 /usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py:650(__init__)
使用已分配的内存测试输出以获得10000000个整数的列表（必须减少调用次数）：
./test.py 1000 10000000
spawn: 20s
379834 function calls (379776 primitive calls) in 20.022 seconds
Ordered by: internal time, cumulative time
List reduced from 144 to 5 due to restriction
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
1000 10.022 0.010 10.022 0.010 {posix.wait4}
1000 8.705 0.009 8.705 0.009 {_cffi__x2c5d2681xf492c09f.posix_spawn}
1000 0.334 0.000 9.412 0.009 /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/posix_spawn-0.1-py2.7.egg/posix_spawn/_impl.py:75(posix_spawn)
1000 0.269 0.000 19.998 0.020 ./test.py:18(spawn)
66000 0.174 0.000 0.318 0.000 /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/cffi/api.py:212(new)
spawn_no_out: 1s
334013 function calls in 1.480 seconds
Ordered by: internal time, cumulative time
List reduced from 25 to 5 due to restriction
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
1000 0.755 0.001 0.755 0.001 {posix.wait4}
1000 0.198 0.000 0.198 0.000 {_cffi__x2c5d2681xf492c09f.posix_spawn}
1000 0.171 0.000 0.708 0.001 /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/posix_spawn-0.1-py2.7.egg/posix_spawn/_impl.py:75(posix_spawn)
65000 0.167 0.000 0.298 0.000 /usr/local/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/cffi/api.py:212(new)
65000 0.050 0.000 0.050 0.000 {_cffi_backend.newp}
fork: 18s
84067 function calls in 18.554 seconds
Ordered by: internal time, cumulative time
List reduced from 53 to 5 due to restriction
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
1000 9.399 0.009 9.399 0.009 {posix.read}
1000 7.815 0.008 7.815 0.008 {posix.fork}
1054 0.414 0.000 0.414 0.000 {built-in method poll}
1000 0.274 0.000 17.626 0.018 /usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py:1187(_execute_child)
1000 0.078 0.000 17.871 0.018 /usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py:650(__init__)
fork_no_out: 18s
33013 function calls in 18.732 seconds
Ordered by: internal time, cumulative time
List reduced from 36 to 5 due to restriction
ncalls tottime percall cumtime percall filename:lineno(function)
1000 9.467 0.009 9.467 0.009 {posix.read}
1000 8.020 0.008 8.020 0.008 {posix.fork}
1000 0.603 0.001 0.603 0.001 {posix.waitpid}
1000 0.280 0.000 17.910 0.018 /usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py:1187(_execute_child)
1000 0.072 0.000 18.000 0.018 /usr/lib/python2.7/subprocess.py:650(__init__)
没有分析结果是一样的。 正如我们所看到的，当我们使用和不使用捕获进程输出调用posix_spawn时，性能存在巨大差异（1.4s vs 20s！）。没有额外的重拨 - posix.wait4 只需要更多时间。 我在这里做错了什么？有人知道它为什么会发生以及如何为posix_spawn获得更好的性能吗？
P.S。在Linux Mint 17和CentOS 6.5上测试 - 结果相同。
更新： 即使我们将空的FileActions对象传递给posix_spawn而没有实际读取stdout / stderr，也会发生相同的性能下降：
def spawn(args):
command = args[0]
pid = posix_spawn(command, args, file_actions=FileActions())
status, rusage = exits(pid)
答案 0 :(得分：2)
好的，对于后代 - 似乎如果设置了file_actions并且没有设置某些标志，则posix_spawn只使用fork：https://sourceware.org/git/?p=glibc.git;a=blob;f=sysdeps/posix/spawni.c;h=2d3ae941dd19f0348ed95c0b957c68c3c0e9815d;hb=c758a6861537815c759cba2018a3b1abb1943842#l97
答案 1 :(得分：0)
从函数的源代码，在alexgorin的答案中链接，在我看来这个标志超过了其他参数：
POSIX_SPAWN_USEVFORK
尝试并让我知道