What to cache when building Rust using Gitlab CI or similar

Update: caching $RUSTUP_HOME and $CARGO_HOME does not work for me – I removed them.

When building your project with Gitlab CI or a similar build tool, you can end up spending a lot of time watching your build repeat the same steps over and over. This is especially frustrating when it mostly consists of downloading and compiling the same things we downloaded and compiled last time.

To mitigate this, we can ask Gitlab CI to cache things that will be the same next time.

For a Rust project, the most important thing to cache is target in the local directory.

Update: nope, incorrect But, if you are installing tools using rustup or cargo, it will really help if you cache those too. Fortunately, Rust knows where those are by using environment variables, and these are defined in the standard Rust Docker image.

Update: if anyone knows how to cache the output of rustup and cargo installations, let me know. I think I would need to push a Docker image to Dockerhub to do it?

We can make sure we’re caching as much as possible by adding a section like this to .gitlab-ci.yml:

    cache:
        key: shared-cache
        paths:
            - target/

If you add this to all your jobs, they will share a single cache between them, and cache the local target directory as well as any tools installed with rustup or cargo.

Here is a full example from my Evolve SVGs project:

image: rust:latest

before_script:
    - rustup component add rustfmt
    - rustup target add wasm32-unknown-unknown
    - cargo install trunk wasm-bindgen-cli

pages:
    stage: deploy
    script:
        - echo "Publishing pages to" $CI_PAGES_URL
        - make deploy
        - mv dist public
    artifacts:
      paths:
        - public
    only:
        - main
    cache:
        key: shared-cache
        paths:
            - target/

test:
    stage: test
    script:
        - make test
    cache:
        key: shared-cache
        paths:
            - target/

Announcing I-DUNNO 1.0 and web-i-dunno

It’s hard to believe it’s already a year since the release of RFC 8771 (The Internationalized Deliberately Unreadable Network NOtation), which for me at least made me think about IP addresses in a whole new way.

So, it seems fitting for the anniversary to be able to release proper support for this standard in the Rust universe, with Rust I-DUNNO version 1.0 released. You can find it on Rust’s crates.io at crates.io/crates/i-dunno and the API documentation is at docs.rs/i-dunno.

Also, because for a standard like this to receive the wide adoption it deserves, it’s important that young people have a chance to interact with it, playing with encodings to get a real feel for what it’s like to use in practice, I’m proud to announce the I-DUNNO Creator. On that page you can enter an IP address (IPv4 or IPv6) and see it transformed immediately into a candidate I-DUNNO, with live information about the Confusion Level of the I-DUNNO, as specified in the standard. You can find the source code for the I-DUNNO Creator in the web-i-dunno repo.

The I-DUNNO Creator is built on the Rust package, making use of Rust’s highly-developed WASM support to compile the code into a form that works naturally in a web browser.

I hope that by offering both systems programmers and the young people of today and their new-fangled web sites the opportunity to create I-DUNNOs, I can contribute a little to spreading the word about deliberately unreadable notations to new audiences.

Note: the current implementation is limited to generate only I-DUNNOs with no padding bits. As specified in the standard, I-DUNNOs may end with arbitrary padding, and adding this functionality to rust-i-dunno is left as an exercise for the reader: merge requests welcome!

Announcing Rust I-DUNNO

At the ACCU Conference last week I learned about RFC 8771 The Internationalized Deliberately Unreadable Network NOtation (I-DUNNO) from Jim Hague, and thought it would be fun to knock up a Rust implementation.

The project is here: gitlab.com/andybalaam/rust-i-dunno and the docs are published at https://docs.rs/i-dunno.

It’s not done yet, but encoding an IP address as I-DUNNO appears to be working:

$ i-dunno 216.58.205.46
lYÔ®

$ i-dunno 216.58.205.46 | hexdump -C
00000000  db 81 6b 1a 2e 0a                                 |..k...|

Decoding is still to be done.

The implementation is seriously slow at the moment, so I am looking forward to improving it.

I am hoping it is reasonably correct – I based it on the existing Python I-DUNNO implementation and in the process found several potential bugs in that, and created some merge requests to fix bugs and help with testability.

Speaking of testability, I am building up a collection of test cases that could be a potential resource for other implementors, and would welcome suggestions of how this could be shared between projects. The examples so far were generated using the Python implementation, and then manually corrected where I found bugs in that, so I do not have 100% confidence that they are correct.

Anyway, have a play, and send patches and feedback!

Limiting the number of open sockets in a tokio-based TCP listener

I learned quite a bit today about how to think about concurrency in Rust. I was trying to use a Semaphore to limit how many open sockets my TCP listener allowed, and I had real trouble making it work. It either didn’t actually work, allowing any number of clients to connect, or the compiler told me I couldn’t do what I wanted to do, because the lifetime of my Semaphore was not 'static. Here’s the journey I took towards working code that I think is correct (feedback welcome).

Motivation

In the tokio tutorial there is a short section entitled “Backpressure and bounded channels” (partway down the Channels page). It contains this statement:

…take care to ensure total amount of concurrency is bounded. For example, when writing a TCP accept loop, ensure that the total number of open sockets is bounded.

Obviously, when I started work on a TCP accept loop, I wanted to follow this advice.

Like many things in my journey with Rust, it was harder than I expected, and eventually enlightening.

The code

Here is a short Rust program that listens on a TCP port and accepts incoming connections.

Cargo.toml:

[package]
name = "tcp-listener-example"
version = "1.0.0"
edition = "2018"
include = ["src/"]

[dependencies]
tokio = { version = ">=1.0.1", features = ["full"] }

src/main.rs:

use tokio::io::AsyncReadExt;
use tokio::net::TcpListener;

#[tokio::main]
async fn main() {
    let listener = TcpListener::bind("0.0.0.0:8080").await.unwrap();

    loop {
        let (mut tcp_stream, _) = listener.accept().await.unwrap();
        tokio::spawn(async move {
            let mut buf: [u8; 1024] = [0; 1024];
            loop {
                let n = tcp_stream.read(&mut buf).await.unwrap();
                if n == 0 {
                    return;
                }
                print!("{}", String::from_utf8_lossy(&buf[0..n]));
            }
        });
    }
}

This program listens on port 8080, and every time a client connects, it spawns an asynchronous task to deal with it.

If I run it with:

cargo run

It starts, and I can connect to it from multiple other processes like this:

telnet 0.0.0.0 8080

Anything I type into the telnet terminal window gets printed out in the terminal where I ran cargo run. The program works: it listens on TCP port 8080 and prints out all the messages it receives.

So what’s the problem?

The problem is that this program can be overwhelmed: if lots of processes connect to it, it will accept all the connections, and eventually run out of sockets. This might prevent other things working right on the computer, or it might crash our program, or something else. We need some kind of sensible limit, as the tokio tutorial mentions.

So how do we limit the number of people allowed to connect at the same time?

Just use a semaphore, dummy

A semaphore does exactly what we need here – it keeps a count of how many people are doing something, and prevents that number getting too big. So all we need to do is restrict the number of clients that we allow to connect using a semaphore.

Here was my first attempt:

use tokio::io::AsyncReadExt;
use tokio::net::TcpListener;
use tokio::sync::Semaphore;

#[tokio::main]
async fn main() {
    let listener = TcpListener::bind("0.0.0.0:8080").await.unwrap();
    let sem = Semaphore::new(2);

    loop {
        let (mut tcp_stream, _) = listener.accept().await.unwrap();
        // Don't copy this code: it doesn't work
        let aq = sem.try_acquire();
        if let Ok(_guard) = aq {
            tokio::spawn(async move {
                let mut buf: [u8; 1024] = [0; 1024];
                loop {
                    let n = tcp_stream.read(&mut buf).await.unwrap();
                    if n == 0 {
                        return;
                    }
                    print!("{}", String::from_utf8_lossy(&buf[0..n]));
                }
            });
        } else {
            println!("Rejecting client: too many open sockets");
        }
    }
}

This compiles fine, but it doesn’t do anything! Even though we called Semaphore::new with an argument of 2, intending to allow only 2 clients to connect, in fact I can still connect more times than that. It looks like our code changes had no effect at all.

What we were hoping to happen was that every time a client connected, we created _guard, which is a SemaphoreGuard, that occupies one of the slots in the semaphore. We were expecting that guard to live until the client disconnects, at which point the slot will be released.

Why doesn’t it work? It’s easy to understand when you think about what tokio::spawn does. It creates a task and asks for it to be executed in the future, but it doesn’t actually run it. So tokio::spawn returns immediately, and _guard is dropped, before the code that handles the request is executed. So, obviously, our change doesn’t actually restrict how many requests are being handled because the semaphore slot is freed up before the request is processed.

Just hold the guard for longer, dummy

So, let’s hold on to the SemaphoreGuard for longer:

use tokio::io::AsyncReadExt;
use tokio::net::TcpListener;
use tokio::sync::Semaphore;

#[tokio::main]
async fn main() {
    let listener = TcpListener::bind("0.0.0.0:8080").await.unwrap();
    let sem = Semaphore::new(2);

    loop {
        let (mut tcp_stream, _) = listener.accept().await.unwrap();
        let aq = sem.try_acquire();
        if let Ok(guard) = aq {
            tokio::spawn(async move {
                let mut buf: [u8; 1024] = [0; 1024];
                loop {
                    let n = tcp_stream.read(&mut buf).await.unwrap();
                    if n == 0 {
                        drop(guard);
                        return;
                    }
                    print!("{}", String::from_utf8_lossy(&buf[0..n]));
                }
            });
        } else {
            println!("Rejecting client: too many open sockets");
        }
    }
}

The idea is to pass the SemaphoreGuard object into the code that actually deals with the client request. The way I’ve attempted that is by referring to guard somewhere within the async move closure. What I’ve actually done is tell it to drop guard when we are finished with the request, but actually any mention of that variable within the closure would have been enough to tell the compiler we want to move it in, and only drop it when we are done.

It all sounds reasonable, but actually this code doesn’t compile. Here’s the error I get:

error[E0597]: `sem` does not live long enough
  --> src/main.rs:12:18
   |
12 |         let aq = sem.try_acquire();
   |                  ^^^--------------
   |                  |
   |                  borrowed value does not live long enough
   |                  argument requires that `sem` is borrowed for `'static`
...
29 | }
   | - `sem` dropped here while still borrowed

What the compiler is saying is that our SemaphoreGuard is referring to sem (the Semaphore object), but that the guard might live longer than the semaphore.

Why? Surely sem is held within a scope that includes the whole of the client-handling code, so it should live long enough?

No. Actually, the async move closure that we are passing to tokio::spawn is being added to a list of tasks to run in the future, so it could live much longer. The fact that we are inside an infinite loop confused me further here, but the principle still remains: whenever we make a closure like this and pass something into it, the closure must own it, or if we are borrowing it, it must live forever (which is what a 'static lifetime means).

The code above passes ownership of guard to the closure, but guard itself is referring to (borrowing) sem. This is why the compiler says that “sem is borrowed for 'static“.

Wrong things I tried

Because I didn’t understand what I was doing, I tried various other things like making sem an Arc, making guard an Arc, creating guard inside the closure, and even trying to make sem actually have 'static storage by making it a constant. (That last one didn’t work because only very simple types like numbers and strings can be constants.)

Solution: Share the Semaphore in an Arc

After what felt like too much thrashing around, I found what I think is the right answer:

use std::sync::Arc;
use tokio::io::AsyncReadExt;
use tokio::net::TcpListener;
use tokio::sync::Semaphore;

#[tokio::main]
async fn main() {
    let listener = TcpListener::bind("0.0.0.0:8080").await.unwrap();
    let sem = Arc::new(Semaphore::new(2));

    loop {
        let (mut tcp_stream, _) = listener.accept().await.unwrap();
        let sem_clone = Arc::clone(&sem);
        tokio::spawn(async move {
            let aq = sem_clone.try_acquire();
            if let Ok(_guard) = aq {
                let mut buf: [u8; 1024] = [0; 1024];
                loop {
                    let n = tcp_stream.read(&mut buf).await.unwrap();
                    if n == 0 {
                        return;
                    }
                    print!("{}", String::from_utf8_lossy(&buf[0..n]));
                }
            } else {
                println!("Rejecting client: too many open sockets");
            }
        });
    }
}

This code:

  • Creates a Semaphore and stores it inside an Arc, which is a reference-counting pointer that can be shared between tasks. This means it will live as long as someone holds a reference to it.
  • Clones the Arc so we have a copy that can be safely moved into the async move closure. We can’t move sem in to the closure because it’s going to get used again the next time around the loop. We can move sem_clone in to the closure because it’s not used anywhere else. sem and sem_clone both refer to the same Semaphore object, so they agree on the count of clients that are connected, but they are different Arc instances, so one can be moved into the closure.
  • Only aquires the SemaphoreGuard once we’re inside the closure. This way we’re not doing something difficult like borrowing a reference to something that lives outside the closure. Instead, we’re borrowing a reference via sem_clone, which is owned by the closure which we are inside, so we know it will live long enough.

It actually works! After two clients are connected, listener.accept actually opens a socket to any new client, but because we return almost immediately from the closure, we only hold it open very briefly before dropping it. This seemed preferable to refusing to open it at all, which I thought would probably leave clients hanging, waiting for a connection that might never come.

Lifetimes are cool, and tricky

Once again, I have learned a lot about what my code is really doing from the Rust compiler. I find this stuff really confusing, but hopefully by writing down my understanding in this post I have helped my current and future selves, and maybe even you, be clearer about how to share a semaphore between multiple asynchronous tasks.

It’s really fun and empowering to write code that I am reasonably confident is correct, and also works. The sense that “the compiler has my back” is strong, and I like it.

Shutdown order consistency: how Rust helps

Some Java code with bugs

Here’s my main method (in Java). Can you guess the bug?

Db db = new Db();
Monitoring monitoring = new Monitoring();
Monitoring mon2 = new Monitoring();
Billing billing = new Billing(db, monitoring);
monitoring.setDb(db);

runMainLoop(billing, mon2);

db.stop();
billing.stop();
monitoring.stop();

If you would like to hunt down the 2 bugs manually, try reading the full code here: ShutdownOrder.java

But maybe you have an idea already? Maybe you’ve seen code like this before? If you have, you probably have an instinct that there’s some kind of bug, even if you can’t say for sure what it is. Code like this almost always has bugs!

This code compiles fine, but it contains two bugs.

First, we forgot to setDb() on mon2. This causes a NullPointerException, because Monitoring expects always to have a working Db.

Second, and in general harder to spot, we shut down our services in the wrong order. It turns out that Monitoring uses its Db during shutdown, so we get an exception. Even worse, if some other code needed to run after monitoring.stop(), it won’t, because the exception prevents us getting any further.

Of course, this is toy code, but this kind of problem is common (and much harder to spot) in real-life code. In fact, my team dealt with a similar bug this week.

It’s fundamentally hard to figure out your shutdown order. It’s complicated further if classes have start() methods too, which I have seen in lots of Java code.

Given that this is just a hard problem, maybe there’s no point looking for tools to make it easier?

Some Rust code without those bugs

Let’s try writing this code in Rust. Here’s the main method:

let db = Db::new();
let monitoring = Monitoring::new(&db);
let mon2 = Monitoring::new(&db);
let billing = Billing::new(&db, &monitoring);

run_main_loop(&billing, &mon2);

// drop() is called automatically on all objects here

Here’s the full code: shutdown_order.rs

This code shuts down all the services automatically at the end, and any mistakes we make in the order are compile errors, not things we find later when our code is running.

The code to shut down each service looks like this:

impl Drop for Monitoring<'_> {
    fn drop(&mut self) {
        // [Disconnect from monitoring API]
        self.db.add_record("MonitorShutDown");
    }
}

This is us implementing the Drop trait for the struct Monitoring (traits are a bit like Java Interfaces). The Drop trait is special: it indicates what to do when an instance of this struct is dropped. In Rust, this is guaranteed to happen when the instance goes out of scope, which is why our comment at the end of the main method sounds so confident.

Furthermore, Rust’s compiler shuts down everything in the reverse order in which it was created, and guarantees that nothing gets used after it has been dropped.

Rust’s lovely world gives us two relevant treats: no unexpected nulls, and lifetimes.

Treat number 1: no unexpected nulls

First, in Rust, like in other modern languages like Kotlin, we have to be explicit about items that could be missing. In our example, we were able to re-arrange the code so that db can never be missing (or null), and the compiler encouraged us to do so. If we really needed it to be missing some of the time, we could have used the Option type, and the compiler would have forced us to handle the case when it was missing, instead of unexpectedly getting a NullPointerException like we did in Java. (In fact, if we’d structured our code to use final in as many places as possible, we could have been encouraged towards basically the same solution in Java too.)

Treat number 2: lifetimes

Second, if you look a bit more closely at the full code of shutdown_order.rs you’ll see lots of confusing-looking annotations like <'a> and &'a:

struct Monitoring<'a> {
    db: &'a Db,
}

The approximate meaning of those annotations is: a Monitoring holds a reference to a Db, and that Db must last longer than the Monitoring.

This “lasts longer than” wording is what Rust Lifetimes are for. Lifetimes are a way of saying how long something lasts.

Lifetimes are really confusing when you start with Rust, and have caused me a lot of pain. Code like this is where they are both most painful and most helpful. As I mentioned earlier, the problem of shutdown order is fundamentally hard. Rust gives you that pain at the beginning, and until you understand what’s going on, the pain is very confusing and acute. But, once your code compiles, it is correct, at least as far as problems like this are concerned.

I love the sense of security it gives me to write Rust code and know the compiler has checked my code for this kind of problem, meaning it can’t crop up at 3am on Christmas Day…

Final note/caveat

This Rust code is probably over-simplified, because all the references are immutable (you can’t change the objects they point to). In practice, we may well have mutable references, and if we do we’re going have to deal with the further difficulty that Rust won’t allow two different objects to hold references to an object if any of those references are mutable. So it would object to Billing and Monitoring using the Db object at the same time. We’d need to make it immutable (as we have here), or find a different way of structuring the code: for example, we could hold the Db instance only within the run_main_loop code, and pass it in temporarily to the Billing and Monitoring objects when we called their methods. A large part of the art, fun and pain of learning Rust is finding new patterns for your code that do what you need to do and also keep the compiler happy. When you manage it, you get amazing benefits!