Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
railsatscale.com
Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
1–10 of 57 posts
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#2I moved from ruby 2.7 to 3.2 for a rails app and was hopeful that it would lead to large speedups like shopify claims it did for them, but was bummed to find it did basically nothing. Anyone else running a large rails app have a similar or different experience?
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#3I moved from ruby 2.7 to 3.2 for a rails app and was hopeful that it would lead to large speedups like shopify claims it did for them, but was bummed to find it did basically nothing. Anyone else running a large rails app have a similar or different experience?
Yeah, our last benchmark was with 3.1.2 + YJIT, but we actually saw a regression in term of performance while RAM usage was indeed up: https://serpapi.com/blog/benchmarking-ruby-3-1-yjit-ruby-2-7...
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#4I moved from ruby 2.7 to 3.2 for a rails app and was hopeful that it would lead to large speedups like shopify claims it did for them, but was bummed to find it did basically nothing. Anyone else running a large rails app have a similar or different experience?
Yeah, our last benchmark was with 3.1.2 + YJIT, but we actually saw a regression in term of performance while RAM usage was indeed up: https://serpapi.com/blog/benchmarking-ruby-3-1-yjit-ruby-2-7...
Very interesting blog post! My best guess as to how shopify is able to achieve such large increases in speed is they have a lot more actual ruby code than most codebases (https://shopify.engineering/ruby-yjit-is-production-ready).
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#5I moved from ruby 2.7 to 3.2 for a rails app and was hopeful that it would lead to large speedups like shopify claims it did for them, but was bummed to find it did basically nothing. Anyone else running a large rails app have a similar or different experience?
Yeah, our last benchmark was with 3.1.2 + YJIT, but we actually saw a regression in term of performance while RAM usage was indeed up: https://serpapi.com/blog/benchmarking-ruby-3-1-yjit-ruby-2-7...
Hope you try again with 3.3. The improvements we've made to YJIT since Ruby 3.1 are massive.
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#6I moved from ruby 2.7 to 3.2 for a rails app and was hopeful that it would lead to large speedups like shopify claims it did for them, but was bummed to find it did basically nothing. Anyone else running a large rails app have a similar or different experience?
We saw memory go up when moving from 3.1 to 3.2, but we also removed compiling Ruby with jemalloc and used the defaults. We have seen performance increase by about 10% for our web applications. Our forking background processes run about the same. YJIT appears to perform for repeated requests – ie first run will not expose any benefit, ie your tests won't run faster.
[edit, the memory increase was small just a few percent IRC]
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#7I get the need to improve Ruby's speed and memory usage, but there's much to be desired. I really enjoy Rails and Ruby in general, but the performance is terrible.
I'd like to see how Ruby 3.3 stacks up to other languages and runtimes.
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#8I moved from ruby 2.7 to 3.2 for a rails app and was hopeful that it would lead to large speedups like shopify claims it did for them, but was bummed to find it did basically nothing. Anyone else running a large rails app have a similar or different experience?
Yeah, our last benchmark was with 3.1.2 + YJIT, but we actually saw a regression in term of performance while RAM usage was indeed up: https://serpapi.com/blog/benchmarking-ruby-3-1-yjit-ruby-2-7...
We kept YJIT off for 3.1, but turned it on for 3.2. I am working from my memory here, but I recall 3.1 not performing well with YJIT.
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#9I used to work with Ruby and Rails and I really found Ruby to be a very comfortable, terse, and expressive language, but I found it very slow after trying some compiled languages (I think I compared service startup and some simple computationally heavy stuff like Advent of Code or Project Euler solutions) and I just couldn’t go back to Ruby after that. Also I found the Rails (framework) stacktraces and source code very hard to follow.
However, that was quite some time ago. Does anyone have any more recent opinions? How is it to work on a large modern Ruby or Rails codebase? Also, I saw some type annotations examples a few years back and thought they looked pretty ugly - is that how I would feel after some months using them, too?
Re: Ruby 3.3's YJIT: Faster While Using Less Memory
#10I used to work with Ruby and Rails and I really found Ruby to be a very comfortable, terse, and expressive language, but I found it very slow after trying some compiled languages (I think I compared service startup and some simple computationally heavy stuff like Advent of Code or Project Euler solutions) and I just couldn’t go back to Ruby after that. Also I found the Rails (framework) stacktraces and source code ve…
> Also, I saw some type annotations examples a few years back
You probably saw the third party tool Sorbet. I agree it's ugly and extremely limited. Ruby's native typing solution, RBS, is written in a separate file. It's a bit better but... it's written in a separate file...
Most major companies seem to still primarily rely on Sorbet. Yeah I'd say the typing scene in Ruby is still one of it's greatest limitations