Skip to content

[PERF] Excessive Disk I/O Inside Monitor Loop#98

Closed
arumes31 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
perf-optimize-monitor-io-14355429220984483248
Closed

[PERF] Excessive Disk I/O Inside Monitor Loop#98
arumes31 wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
perf-optimize-monitor-io-14355429220984483248

Conversation

@arumes31
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@arumes31 arumes31 commented Jun 2, 2026

This PR addresses excessive disk I/O in the service monitor loop by implementing an in-memory caching layer in the internal/config package.

Previously, the monitor loop parsed config.json from disk in every iteration to check for paused status or configuration updates. The new implementation serves these requests from a thread-safe in-memory cache, which is only invalidated and refreshed during Save or Update operations.

Key changes:

  • In-memory cachedConfig and cachedStatus with sync.RWMutex protection.
  • Deep copy mechanism using JSON marshaling to ensure callers cannot mutate the cache.
  • Double-checked locking in LoadConfig and LoadStatus.
  • Safety check in monitorService to prevent time.NewTicker panics on zero intervals.
  • New unit test TestConfigCaching to verify cache persistence across disk corruption.
  • Private clearCache() helper for test isolation.

PR created automatically by Jules for task 14355429220984483248 started by @arumes31

- Added thread-safe in-memory caching for Config and Status.
- Used double-checked locking and deep copying.
- Added safety check for zero intervals in monitor loop.
- Added cache verification tests.

Co-authored-by: arumes31 <114224498+arumes31@users.noreply.github.com>
@google-labs-jules
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

👋 Jules, reporting for duty! I'm here to lend a hand with this pull request.

When you start a review, I'll add a 👀 emoji to each comment to let you know I've read it. I'll focus on feedback directed at me and will do my best to stay out of conversations between you and other bots or reviewers to keep the noise down.

I'll push a commit with your requested changes shortly after. Please note there might be a delay between these steps, but rest assured I'm on the job!

For more direct control, you can switch me to Reactive Mode. When this mode is on, I will only act on comments where you specifically mention me with @jules. You can find this option in the Pull Request section of your global Jules UI settings. You can always switch back!

New to Jules? Learn more at jules.google/docs.


For security, I will only act on instructions from the user who triggered this task.

@coderabbitai
Copy link
Copy Markdown

coderabbitai Bot commented Jun 2, 2026

Important

Review skipped

Draft detected.

Please check the settings in the CodeRabbit UI or the .coderabbit.yaml file in this repository. To trigger a single review, invoke the @coderabbitai review command.

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 19ea9891-6180-454a-b459-05bff38fa769

You can disable this status message by setting the reviews.review_status to false in the CodeRabbit configuration file.

Use the checkbox below for a quick retry:

  • 🔍 Trigger review
✨ Finishing Touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
  • Create PR with unit tests
  • Commit unit tests in branch perf-optimize-monitor-io-14355429220984483248

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.

@arumes31
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner Author

arumes31 commented Jun 4, 2026

Closing as a duplicate. Superseded by the newer #111, which covers the same disk-I/O-in-monitor-loop change. Consolidating review on #111.

@arumes31 arumes31 closed this Jun 4, 2026
@google-labs-jules
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Closing as a duplicate. Superseded by the newer #111, which covers the same disk-I/O-in-monitor-loop change. Consolidating review on #111.

Understood. Acknowledging that this work is a duplicate of #111 and stopping work on this task.

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.

1 participant