Skip to content

⚡ Bolt: JSON 파싱 및 파일 읽기 성능 최적화#370

Open
seonghobae wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
perf-json-bytes-16910090678617400149
Open

⚡ Bolt: JSON 파싱 및 파일 읽기 성능 최적화#370
seonghobae wants to merge 1 commit into
developfrom
perf-json-bytes-16910090678617400149

Conversation

@seonghobae

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

💡 구현 내용 (What)

  • equivalence.pymineru_runner.py에서 JSON 파일 읽기 방식을 path.read_text(encoding="utf-8")에서 path.read_bytes()로 변경했습니다.
  • main.py 파일 업로드 청크 크기를 8KB(8192)에서 1MB(1024 * 1024)로 증가시켰습니다.
  • 관련 테스트 코드(test_mineru_runner_paths.py)의 mock 설정을 read_bytes 기반으로 업데이트했습니다.
  • 성능 최적화 학습 내용을 .jules/bolt.md에 기록했습니다.

🎯 해결하는 문제 (Why)

  • 파일에서 JSON을 읽어들일 때 텍스트(read_text())로 변환 후 파싱하면 불필요한 중간 문자열 할당과 UTF-8 디코딩 오버헤드가 발생합니다. json.loads()bytes 객체를 직접 지원하므로 이를 활용해 병목을 개선할 수 있습니다.
  • FastAPI에서 작은 청크 사이즈로 비동기 파일 읽기를 반복 수행하면 비동기 이벤트 루프 횟수 증가와 스레드 디스패치 오버헤드가 누적됩니다. 파일 크기가 큰 PDF 업로드 시 성능 저하 요인이 되므로 적절한 청크 사이즈 조절이 필요합니다.

📊 성능/영향 (Impact)

  • JSON 파싱: 중간 디코딩 생략에 따른 파싱 속도 향상.
  • 파일 업로드: 이벤트 루프 반복 횟수를 대폭 감소시켜 CPU 오버헤드와 파일 읽기 시간을 줄입니다.

🔬 측정/검증 방법 (Measurement)

  • uv run ruff format src/uv run ruff check src/ --fix 린터 통과.
  • uv run pytest --cov=src/newsdom_api --cov-branch --cov-report=term-missing --cov-fail-under=100 커버리지 통과.

PR created automatically by Jules for task 16910090678617400149 started by @seonghobae

- `json.loads(path.read_text())` 대신 `json.loads(path.read_bytes())`를 사용하도록 수정.
- 문자열 디코딩 및 중간 할당(allocation) 과정을 생략하여 대용량 JSON 파싱 속도를 향상시킴.
- 테스트의 mock 부분을 `read_bytes`에 맞게 수정.
- 파일 업로드의 비동기 루프 및 스레드 디스패치 오버헤드를 줄이기 위해, `while chunk := await file.read(8192)`의 청크 사이즈를 `1MB`로 증가시킴.
@google-labs-jules

Copy link
Copy Markdown

👋 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.

@opencode-agent opencode-agent Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head b04d853701d3f92d6e09d60c7c646b970dba708f.

  • Head SHA: b04d853701d3f92d6e09d60c7c646b970dba708f

  • Workflow run: 29647019215

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

  • Result: FAIL
  • Test evidence: not proven passing
  • Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
  • Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Loading

@opencode-agent

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

OpenCode Review Overview

  • Head SHA: b04d853701d3f92d6e09d60c7c646b970dba708f
  • Workflow run: 29647019215
  • Workflow attempt: 1
  • Gate result: REQUEST_CHANGES (approval step)

Pull request overview

OpenCode cannot approve yet because required coverage evidence did not pass.

Review outcome

1. HIGH .github/workflows/opencode-review.yml:1 - Coverage evidence did not prove required test/docstring evidence

  • Problem: The required coverage-evidence job result was failure, so OpenCode cannot establish approval sufficiency for this head.

  • Root cause: Automated approval is only valid when the same-head coverage-evidence job proves supported repository test suites passed and configured docstring gates passed or were advisory, or reports not applicable because no supported source files or package manifests exist. Missing, failed, skipped, unavailable, or unsupported-tooling test evidence is a blocker.

  • Fix: Install or configure the repository test/docstring evidence tooling when source files or package manifests exist, rerun the current-head coverage-evidence job, and approve only after it reports success with required evidence or explicit no-source not-applicable evidence.

  • Regression test: Keep the approval branch checking needs.coverage-evidence.result == success before posting APPROVE, and publish REQUEST_CHANGES when coverage-evidence blocker states such as cancelled, skipped, failed, unsupported-tooling, or below-100 evidence are present.

  • Result: REQUEST_CHANGES

  • Reason: coverage-evidence result was failure, so required test/docstring evidence was not proven for current head b04d853701d3f92d6e09d60c7c646b970dba708f.

  • Head SHA: b04d853701d3f92d6e09d60c7c646b970dba708f

  • Workflow run: 29647019215

  • Workflow attempt: 1

Coverage evidence

Coverage Decision

  • Result: FAIL
  • Test evidence: not proven passing
  • Docstring evidence: not proven passing when configured
  • Failure count: 1

Changed-File Evidence Map

flowchart LR
  PR["PR changed files"] --> Evidence["OpenCode bounded evidence"]
  Evidence --> S1["Changed file (2 files)"]
  S1 --> I1["repository behavior"]
  I1 --> R1["Review risk: Changed file (2 files)"]
  R1 --> V1["required checks"]
Loading

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