Reduce the overhead of `uv run` in large workspaces. Instead of
re-discovering the entire workspace each time we resolve the metadata of
a member, we can the discovered set of workspace members. Care needs to
be taken to not cache the discovery for `uv init`, `uv add` and `uv
remove`, which change the definitions of workspace members.
Below is apache airflow e3fe06382df4b19f2c0de40ce7c0bdc726754c74 `uv run
python` with a minimal payload. With this change, we avoid a ~350ms
overhead of each `uv run` invocation.
```
$ hyperfine --warmup 2 \
"uv run --no-dev python -c \"print('hi')\"" \
"uv-profiling run --no-dev python -c \"print('hi')\""
Benchmark 1: uv run --no-dev python -c "print('hi')"
Time (mean ± σ): 492.6 ms ± 7.0 ms [User: 393.2 ms, System: 97.1 ms]
Range (min … max): 482.3 ms … 501.5 ms 10 runs
Benchmark 2: uv-profiling run --no-dev python -c "print('hi')"
Time (mean ± σ): 129.7 ms ± 2.5 ms [User: 105.4 ms, System: 23.2 ms]
Range (min … max): 126.0 ms … 136.1 ms 22 runs
Summary
uv-profiling run --no-dev python -c "print('hi')" ran
3.80 ± 0.09 times faster than uv run --no-dev python -c "print('hi')"
```
The profile after those change below. We still spend a large chunk in
toml parsing (both `uv.lock` and `pyproject.toml`), but it's not
excessive anymore.
When running `uv pip install .` in a directory with a pyproject.toml
that does not configure a build, we will invoke setuptools and get a
wheel we can't parse (https://github.com/astral-sh/uv/issues/11344).
This PR adds warnings around these setups.
---------
Co-authored-by: Charlie Marsh <charlie.r.marsh@gmail.com>
Build failures are one of the most common user facing failures that
aren't "obivous" errors (such as typos) or resolver errors. Currently,
they show more technical details than being focussed on this being an
error in a subprocess that is either on the side of the package or -
more likely - in the build environment, e.g. the user needs to install a
dev package or their python version is incompatible.
The new error message clearly delineates the part that's important (this
is a build backend problem) from the internals (we called this hook) and
is consistent about which part of the dist building stage failed. We
have to calibrate the exact wording of the error message some more. Most
of the implementation is working around the orphan rule, (this)error
rules and trait rules, so it came out more of a refactoring than
intended.
Example:
## Summary
This PR declares and documents all environment variables that are used
in one way or another in `uv`, either internally, or externally, or
transitively under a common struct.
I think over time as uv has grown there's been many environment
variables introduced. Its harder to know which ones exists, which ones
are missing, what they're used for, or where are they used across the
code. The docs only documents a handful of them, for others you'd have
to dive into the code and inspect across crates to know which crates
they're used on or where they're relevant.
This PR is a starting attempt to unify them, make it easier to discover
which ones we have, and maybe unlock future posibilities in automating
generating documentation for them.
I think we can split out into multiple structs later to better organize,
but given the high influx of PR's and possibly new environment variables
introduced/re-used, it would be hard to try to organize them all now
into their proper namespaced struct while this is all happening given
merge conflicts and/or keeping up to date.
I don't think this has any impact on performance as they all should
still be inlined, although it may affect local build times on changes to
the environment vars as more crates would likely need a rebuild. Lastly,
some of them are declared but not used in the code, for example those in
`build.rs`. I left them declared because I still think it's useful to at
least have a reference.
Did I miss any? Are their initial docs cohesive?
Note, `uv-static` is a terrible name for a new crate, thoughts? Others
considered `uv-vars`, `uv-consts`.
## Test Plan
Existing tests
As per
https://matklad.github.io/2021/02/27/delete-cargo-integration-tests.html
Before that, there were 91 separate integration tests binary.
(As discussed on Discord — I've done the `uv` crate, there's still a few
more commits coming before this is mergeable, and I want to see how it
performs in CI and locally).
uv will soon support both a build frontend (`uv build`) and a build
backend (`build-system = "uv"`). To avoid the name clash, I'm renaming
the `uv-build` crate to `uv-build-frontend`. In a follow-up PR, I will
add a `uv-build-backend` crate with the build backend implementation.
2024-09-25 14:17:54 -04:00
Renamed from crates/uv-build/Cargo.toml (Browse further)
