[core] Use psutil.process_iter to replace psutil.pids
#51123
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
dentiny
reviewed
Mar 6, 2025
| @@ -2289,3 +2287,19 @@ def start_ray_client_server( | |||
| fate_share=fate_share, | |||
| ) | |||
| return process_info | |||
|
|
|||
|
|
|||
| def _is_raylet_process(cmdline: Optional[List[str]]) -> bool: | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What about taking a proc object directly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I may prefer to use cmdline to avoid passing the whole Process object into this function. This makes it easier for us to write mock data for unit tests if needed. Another reason is to avoid using proc.info["cmdline"] in this function so that we can clearly determine that cmdline is used in the loop above; and we can easily know why do we use psutil.process_iter(["cmdline"]).
dentiny
approved these changes
Mar 6, 2025
kevin85421
commented
Mar 7, 2025
| proc = psutil.Process(pid) | ||
| proc_stats.append((get_rss(proc.memory_info()), pid, proc.cmdline())) | ||
| proc_stats.append( | ||
| (get_rss(proc.info["memory_info"]), proc.pid, proc.info["cmdline"]) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
proc.pid is set when Process is constructed. No need to specify it in process_iter.
edoakes
reviewed
Mar 7, 2025
Yes
|
elimelt
pushed a commit
to elimelt/ray
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 9, 2025
…t#51123) * Use `psutil.process_iter` to replace `psutil.pids`. * Use `proc.info["name"]` instead of `proc.name()`. * I'm not sure whether `proc.name()` uses the cache set by `process_iter`, but I'm certain that using info is correct since the official docs frequently use `proc.info[...]` with `process_iter`. * I asked a question on giampaolo/psutil#2518, but I'm not sure how long it will take to get an answer from the community. For now, I think we can merge it, and I'll update the use of psutil if the maintainers have any suggestions. --------- Signed-off-by: kaihsun <kaihsun@anyscale.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why are these changes needed?
psutil.process_iterto replacepsutil.pids.proc.info["name"]instead ofproc.name().proc.name()uses the cache set byprocess_iter, but I'm certain that using info is correct since the official docs frequently useproc.info[...]withprocess_iter.proc.infois slower thanproc.name()giampaolo/psutil#2518, but I'm not sure how long it will take to get an answer from the community. For now, I think we can merge it, and I'll update the use of psutil if the maintainers have any suggestions.Related issue number
Checks
git commit -s) in this PR.scripts/format.shto lint the changes in this PR.method in Tune, I've added it in
doc/source/tune/api/under thecorresponding
.rstfile.