“Please write a program in your prefered language that will send out emails to recipients from a huge list (1 Mio entries) in a performant way. You do not need to send real emails but just fake the email sending by waiting for half a second.”
This task focuses on methods to increase performance.
The obvious problem is the huge workload of 1 Mio entries. Therefore it comes to mind that we would like to divide the workload. Due to python interpreters running sequentially and synchronously, it would take 0.5*1 000 000 seconds, which is not feasible.
For dividing this workload either multiprocessing or multithreading comes to mind.
Firstly, we have to differentiate between multiprocessing and multithreading as they oftenly are mistaken as one and the same thing. If we think in pictures threads can be imagined as literal threads as in threading a needle. Processes are kind of programs on their own. Both methods divide larger problems into chunks that will be solved by multiple threads or processes, but there is a big difference in performance on different kinds of problems. Therefore I will lay out characteristics of both in bullet points:
Multithreading
- use shared memory -> needs sophisticated locking mechanisms to avoid data hazards
- multiple processes executed on one core (Hyperthreading)
- quick spawning, lightweight
- optimal for I/O heavy tasks
Multiprocessing
- each process has its own memory space -> a lot of overhead
- one core can take one process
- more overhead due to multiple python interpreter instances, storage (de-)allocation
- optimal for processing heavy tasks
Also important is the kind of task we face. Multiprocessing and threading both lose efficiency the bigger the sequential part of the problem is, because the cost of synchronisation and communication increases. The bigger the parallelizable portion, the better it works to split up the workload. Here we have a big number of tasks which are quick to solve. Not a lot of processing power is needed, which means that there is little need to communicate inbetween. I expected both to perform similarly with threading having an edge, because of its synergy with I/O tasks. Therefore I tried both and looked at the times
I stopped the time for both programs for 100 mails, 50 mails and 10 mails, trying out 1,2,5,10,100 workers. The result is easy to be interpreted as multithreading was faster in every test run. The completion times had a difference of rougly 10-50ms when using only one thread or one process. This can be reasoned by the bigger overhead of creating and destroying processes. Far more significant was the difference in performance when using more workers. Here the drawback of using multiple processes or cores showed as the programs slowed down drastically for >100 processes. For threading the times slowed down only by a fraction of a second, only even when using >500 seconds.
Therefore threading is superior for I/O heavy tasks and optimal for this problem.
React
Typescript
Django
Laravel
Facebook
Microsoft
Google
Alibaba
D3
Tencent