FastAPI runs api-calls in serial instead of parallel fashion

ghz 1years ago ⋅ 669 views

Question

I have the following code:

import time
from fastapi import FastAPI, Request
    
app = FastAPI()
    
@app.get("/ping")
async def ping(request: Request):
        print("Hello")
        time.sleep(5)
        print("bye")
        return {"ping": "pong!"}

If I run my code on localhost - e.g., http://localhost:8501/ping - in different tabs of the same browser window, I get:

Hello
bye
Hello
bye

instead of:

Hello
Hello
bye
bye

I have read about using httpx, but still, I cannot have a true parallelization. What's the problem?

Answer

As per [FastAPI's documentation](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/async/#path- operation-functions):

When you declare a path operation function with normal def instead of async def, it is run in an external threadpool that is thenawaited, instead of being called directly (as it would block the server).

also, as described [here](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/async/#concurrency-and- async-await):

If you are using a third party library that communicates with something (a database, an API, the file system, etc.) and doesn't have support for using await, (this is currently the case for most database libraries), then declare your path operation functions as normally, with just def.

If your application (somehow) doesn't have to communicate with anything else and wait for it to respond, use async def.

If you just don't know, use normal def.

Note : You can mix def and async def in your path operation functions as much as you need and define each one using the best option for you. FastAPI will do the right thing with them.

Anyway, in any of the cases above, FastAPI will still work asynchronously and be extremely fast.

But by following the steps above, it will be able to do some performance optimizations.

Thus, def endpoints (in the context of asynchronous programming, a function defined with just def is called synchronous function), in FastAPI, run in a separate thread from an external threadpool that is then awaited, and hence, FastAPI will still work asynchronously. In other words, the server will process requests to such endpoints concurrently. Whereas, async def endpoints run in the [event loop](https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio- eventloop.html)—on the main (single) thread—that is, the server will also process requests to such endpoints concurrently / asynchronously , as long as there is an [await](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/38865050/is-await-in- python3-cooperative-multitasking) call to non-blocking I/O-bound operations inside such async def endpoints/routes, such as waiting for (1) data from the client to be sent through the network, (2) contents of a file in the disk to be read, (3) a database operation to finish, etc., (have a look here). If, however, an endpoint defined with async def does not await for something inside, in order to give up time for other tasks in the event loop to run (e.g., requests to the same or other endpoints, background tasks, etc.), each request to such an endpoint will have to be completely finished (i.e., exit the endpoint), before returning control back to the event loop and allow other tasks to run. In other words, in such cases, the server will process requests sequentially. Note that the same concept not only applies to FastAPI endpoints, but also to StreamingResponse's generator function (see StreamingResponse class implementation), as well as Background Tasks (see BackgroundTask class implementation); hence, after reading this answer to the end, you should be able to decide whether you should define a FastAPI endpoint, StreamingResponse's generator, or background task function with def or async def.

The keyword await (which works only within an async def function) passes function control back to the event loop. In other words, it suspends the execution of the surrounding coroutine (i.e., a coroutine object is the result of calling an async def function), and tells the event loop to let something else run, until that awaited task completes. Note that just because you may define a custom function with async def and then await it inside your async def endpoint, it doesn't mean that your code will work asynchronously, if that custom function contains, for example, calls to time.sleep(), CPU-bound tasks, non-async I/O libraries, or any other blocking call that is incompatible with asynchronous Python code. In FastAPI, for example, when using the async methods of [UploadFile](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/tutorial/request- files/#uploadfile), such as await file.read() and await file.write(), FastAPI/Starlette, behind the scenes, actually runs such [methods of File objects](https://docs.python.org/3/tutorial/inputoutput.html#methods-of-file- objects) in an external threadpool (using the async run_in_threadpool() function) and awaits it; otherwise, such methods/operations would block the event loop. You can find out more by having a look at the implementation of the UploadFile class.

Note that async does not mean parallel , but concurrently. Asynchronous code with async and await is many times summarised as using coroutines. Coroutines are collaborative (or cooperatively multitasked), meaning that "at any given time, a program with coroutines is running only one of its coroutines, and this running coroutine suspends its execution only when it explicitly requests to be suspended" (see here and [here](https://stackoverflow.com/questions/1934715/difference-between-a- coroutine-and-a-thread) for more info on coroutines). As described in this article:

Specifically, whenever execution of a currently-running coroutine reaches an await expression, the coroutine may be suspended, and another previously- suspended coroutine may resume execution if what it was suspended on has since returned a value. Suspension can also happen when an async for block requests the next value from an asynchronous iterator or when an async with block is entered or exited, as these operations use await under the hood.

If, however, a blocking I/O-bound or CPU-bound operation was directly executed/called inside an async def function/endpoint, it would block the main thread , and hence, the event loop (as the event loop runs in the main thread). Hence, a blocking operation such as time.sleep() in an async def endpoint would block the entire server (as in the code example provided in your question). Thus, if your endpoint is not going to make any async calls, you could declare it with just def instead, which would be run in an external threadpool that would then be awaited, as explained earlier (more solutions are given in the following sections). Example:

@app.get("/ping")
def ping(request: Request):
    #print(request.client)
    print("Hello")
    time.sleep(5)
    print("bye")
    return "pong"

Otherwise, if the functions that you had to execute inside the endpoint are async functions that you had to await, you should define your endpoint with async def. To demonstrate this, the example below uses the [asyncio.sleep()](https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio- task.html#asyncio.sleep) function (from the asyncio library), which provides a non-blocking sleep operation. The await asyncio.sleep() method will suspend the execution of the surrounding coroutine (until the sleep operation completes), thus allowing other tasks in the event loop to run. Similar examples are given [here](https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio- task.html#coroutine) and here as well.

import asyncio
 
@app.get("/ping")
async def ping(request: Request):
    #print(request.client)
    print("Hello")
    await asyncio.sleep(5)
    print("bye")
    return "pong"

Both the endpoints above will print out the specified messages to the screen in the same order as mentioned in your question—if two requests arrived at around the same time—that is:

Hello
Hello
bye
bye

Important Note

When you call your endpoint for the second (third, and so on) time, please remember to do that from a tab that is isolated from the browser's main session ; otherwise, succeeding requests (i.e., coming after the first one) will be blocked by the browser (on client side ), as the browser will be waiting for response from the server for the previous request before sending the next one. You can confirm that by using print(request.client) inside the endpoint, where you would see the hostname and port number being the same for all incoming requests—if requests were initiated from tabs opened in the same browser window/session)—and hence, those requests would be processed sequentially, because of the browser sending them sequentially in the first place. To solve this, you could either:

  1. Reload the same tab (as is running), or

  2. Open a new tab in an Incognito Window, or

  3. Use a different browser/client to send the request, or

  4. Use the httpx library to make asynchronous HTTP requests, along with the awaitable asyncio.gather(), which allows executing multiple asynchronous operations concurrently and then returns a list of results in the same order the awaitables (tasks) were passed to that function (have a look at this answer for more details).

Example :

    import httpx
import asyncio

URLS = ['http://127.0.0.1:8000/ping'] * 2

async def send(url, client):
    return await client.get(url, timeout=10)

async def main():
    async with httpx.AsyncClient() as client:
        tasks = [send(url, client) for url in URLS]
        responses = await asyncio.gather(*tasks)
        print(*[r.json() for r in responses], sep='\n')

asyncio.run(main())

In case you had to call different endpoints that may take different time to process a request, and you would like to print the response out on client side as soon as it is returned from the server—instead of waiting for asyncio.gather() to gather the results of all tasks and print them out in the same order the tasks were passed to the send() function—you could replace the send() function of the example above with the one shown below:

    async def send(url, client):
    res = await client.get(url, timeout=10)
    print(res.json())
    return res

Async/await and Blocking I/O-bound or CPU-bound Operations

If you are required to use async def (as you might need to await for coroutines inside your endpoint), but also have some synchronous blocking I/O-bound or CPU-bound operation (long-running computation task) that will block the event loop (essentially, the entire server) and won't let other requests to go through, for example:

@app.post("/ping")
async def ping(file: UploadFile = File(...)):
    print("Hello")
    try:
        contents = await file.read()
        res = cpu_bound_task(contents)  # this will block the event loop
    finally:
        await file.close()
    print("bye")
    return "pong"

then:

  1. You should check whether you could change your endpoint's definition to normal def instead of async def. For example, if the only method in your endpoint that has to be awaited is the one reading the file contents (as you mentioned in the comments section below), you could instead declare the type of the endpoint's parameter as bytes (i.e., file: bytes = File()) and thus, FastAPI would read the file for you and you would receive the contents as bytes. Hence, there would be no need to use await file.read(). Please note that the above approach should work for small files, as the enitre file contents would be stored into memory (see the documentation on File Parameters); and hence, if your system does not have enough RAM available to accommodate the accumulated data (if, for example, you have 8GB of RAM, you can’t load a 50GB file), your application may end up crashing. Alternatively, you could call the .read() method of the SpooledTemporaryFile directly (which can be accessed through the .file attribute of the UploadFile object), so that again you don't have to await the .read() method—and as you can now declare your endpoint with normal def, each request will run in a separate thread (example is given below). For more details on how to upload a File, as well how Starlette/FastAPI uses SpooledTemporaryFile behind the scenes, please have a look at this answer and this answer.

    @app.post("/ping") def ping(file: UploadFile = File(...)): print("Hello") try: contents = file.file.read() res = cpu_bound_task(contents) finally: file.file.close() print("bye") return "pong"

  2. Use FastAPI's (Starlette's) run_in_threadpool() function from the concurrency module—as @tiangolo suggested here—which "will run the function in a separate thread to ensure that the main thread (where coroutines are run) does not get blocked" (see here). As described by @tiangolo here, "run_in_threadpool is an awaitable function, the first parameter is a normal function, the next parameters are passed to that function directly. It supports both sequence arguments and keyword arguments".

    from fastapi.concurrency import run_in_threadpool

res = await run_in_threadpool(cpu_bound_task, contents)

  1. Alternatively, use asyncio's loop.run_in_executor()—after obtaining the running event loop using asyncio.get_running_loop()—to run the task, which, in this case, you can await for it to complete and return the result(s), before moving on to the next line of code. Passing None as the executor argument, the default executor will be used; that is ThreadPoolExecutor:

    import asyncio

loop = asyncio.get_running_loop()
res = await loop.run_in_executor(None, cpu_bound_task, contents)

or, if you would like to [pass keyword arguments](https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio-eventloop.html#asyncio- pass-keywords) instead, you could use a lambda expression (e.g., lambda: cpu_bound_task(some_arg=contents)), or, preferably, functools.partial(), which is specifically recommended in the documentation for [loop.run_in_executor()](https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio- eventloop.html#asyncio.loop.run_in_executor):

    import asyncio
from functools import partial

loop = asyncio.get_running_loop()
res = await loop.run_in_executor(None, partial(cpu_bound_task, some_arg=contents))

You could also run your task in a custom ThreadPoolExecutor. For instance:

    import asyncio
import concurrent.futures

loop = asyncio.get_running_loop()
with concurrent.futures.ThreadPoolExecutor() as pool:
    res = await loop.run_in_executor(pool, cpu_bound_task, contents)

In Python 3.9+, you could also use [asyncio.to_thread()](https://docs.python.org/3/library/asyncio- task.html#asyncio.to_thread) to asynchronously run a synchronous function in a separate thread—which, essentially, uses await loop.run_in_executor(None, func_call) under the hood, as can been seen in the implementation of asyncio.to_thread(). The to_thread() function takes the name of a blocking function to execute, as well as any arguments (*args and/or **kwargs) to the function, and then returns a coroutine that can be awaited. Example:

    import asyncio

res = await asyncio.to_thread(cpu_bound_task, contents)

  1. ThreadPoolExecutor will successfully prevent the event loop from being blocked, but won't give you the performance improvement you would expect from running code in parallel ; especially, when one needs to perform CPU-bound operations, such as the ones described here (e.g., audio or image processing, machine learning, and so on). It is thus preferable to run CPU-bound tasks in a separate process —using ProcessPoolExecutor, as shown below—which, again, you can integrate with asyncio, in order to await it to finish its work and return the result(s). As described here, on Windows, it is important to protect the main loop of code to avoid recursive spawning of subprocesses, etc. Basically, your code must be under if __name__ == '__main__':.

    import concurrent.futures

loop = asyncio.get_running_loop()
with concurrent.futures.ProcessPoolExecutor() as pool:
    res = await loop.run_in_executor(pool, cpu_bound_task, contents)
  1. Use moreworkers to take advantage of multi-core CPUs, in order to run multiple processes in parallel and be able to serve more requests. For example, uvicorn main:app --workers 4 (if you are using Gunicorn as a process manager with Uvicorn workers, please have a look at this answer). When using 1 worker, only one process is run. When using multiple workers, this will spawn multiple processes (all single threaded). Each process has a separate Global Interpreter Lock (GIL), as well as its own event loop, which runs in the main thread of each process and executes all tasks in its thread. That means, there is only one thread that can take a lock on the interpreter of each process; unless, of course, you employ additional threads, either outside or inside the event loop, e.g., when using a ThreadPoolExecutor with loop.run_in_executor, or defining endpoints/background tasks/StreamingResponse's generator with normal def instead of async def, as well as when calling UploadFile's methods (see the first two paragraphs of this answer for more details).

Note: Each worker ["has its own things, variables and memory"](https://fastapi.tiangolo.com/deployment/concepts/#memory-per- process). This means that global variables/objects, etc., won't be shared across the processes/workers. In this case, you should consider using a database storage, or Key-Value stores (Caches), as described here and here. Additionally, note that "if you are consuming a large amount of memory in your code, each process will consume an equivalent amount of memory".

  1. If you need to perform heavy background computation and you don't necessarily need it to be run by the same process (for example, you don't need to share memory, variables, etc), you might benefit from using other bigger tools like Celery, as described in FastAPI's documentation.
#fastapi