Skip to content
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

use concurrency for grep and replace commands #80

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mattlqx
Copy link
Collaborator

@mattlqx mattlqx commented Feb 15, 2021

theres a minor improvement in read/write times when performing a grep or replace across a large number of secrets in a path (by large, i mean around 90). the real killer on runtime though is the traversal to determine which paths are nodes vs. leaves. this is still early in my tinkering with it. this will be a draft until i see some decent gains in reducing runtime on my workloads.

will fix #78.

@fishi0x01
Copy link
Owner

fishi0x01 commented Feb 15, 2021

Great observation 👍

At the moment, all non-ambiguous paths trigger 2 queries in order to determine their type.

On recursive operations, most isAmbiguous() calls are actually repeated and redundant. Current cache only works on client.List() calls. However, I think it would be good to have it available for all operations.

I will have a look at that.

@fishi0x01
Copy link
Owner

I will take a look at the caching situation #82

theres a minor improvement in read/write times when performing a grep or replace across a large number of secrets in a path (by large, i mean around 90). the real killer on runtime though is the traversal to determine which paths are nodes vs. leaves. this is still early in my tinkering with it. this will be a draft until i see some decent gains in reducing runtime on my workloads. will fix #78.
@mattlqx mattlqx force-pushed the 78_concurrency branch 2 times, most recently from 3fbc18e to 0b1103e Compare September 11, 2021 00:07
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Perform Vault operations concurrently
2 participants