starred/netbox
1
0
Fork 0
mirror of https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox.git synced 2026-01-11 21:10:29 +01:00
Code Issues 273 Packages Projects Releases 10 Wiki Activity

Slow GraphQL performance after upgrading to v3.5.3 #8349

New Issue
Closed
opened 2025-12-29 20:35:39 +01:00 by adam · 7 comments
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:35:39 +01:00
Owner
Copy Link

Originally created by @glesys-andreas on GitHub (Jul 19, 2023).

NetBox version

v3.5.6

Python version

3.9

Steps to Reproduce

  1. create a vlan with tag 999 and add it to a vlan group, does not matter which one.
  2. Create a bunch of prefixes about 400 - 500:
    [{"prefix": "10.0.0.0/24", "tenant": "Cyberdyne Systems", "status": "active", "vlan": 999}, {"prefix": "10.0.1.0/24", "tenant": "Cyberdyne Systems", "status": "active", "vlan": 999}.....]
  3. Run this query:
query allActivePrefixes {
	prefix_list(status: "active", family: 4) {
		prefix
		description
		tenant {
			name
		}
		vlan {
			group {
				name
			}
			vid
		}
	}
}

Expected Behavior

In our prod environment running v3.5.2 this query takes about 200-400 ms and contains about 1700 prefixes,

Observed Behavior

Test 1:
In our test environment running v3.5.6 the same query takes about 6-8 seconds and contains the same data as prod (1700 prefixes).

Test 2:
Created about 500 vlans on demo.netbox.dev ( currently v3.5.6 ) and got about the same response time here: 6-8 seconds.

The problem started when we upgraded to v3.5.3

Originally created by @glesys-andreas on GitHub (Jul 19, 2023). ### NetBox version v3.5.6 ### Python version 3.9 ### Steps to Reproduce 1. create a vlan with tag 999 and add it to a vlan group, does not matter which one. 2. Create a bunch of prefixes about 400 - 500: [{"prefix": "10.0.0.0/24", "tenant": "Cyberdyne Systems", "status": "active", "vlan": 999}, {"prefix": "10.0.1.0/24", "tenant": "Cyberdyne Systems", "status": "active", "vlan": 999}.....] 3. Run this query: ``` query allActivePrefixes { prefix_list(status: "active", family: 4) { prefix description tenant { name } vlan { group { name } vid } } } ``` ### Expected Behavior In our prod environment running v3.5.2 this query takes about 200-400 ms and contains about 1700 prefixes, ### Observed Behavior Test 1: In our test environment running v3.5.6 the same query takes about 6-8 seconds and contains the same data as prod (1700 prefixes). Test 2: Created about 500 vlans on demo.netbox.dev ( currently v3.5.6 ) and got about the same response time here: 6-8 seconds. The problem started when we upgraded to v3.5.3
adam added the type: bugstatus: needs ownerseverity: medium labels 2025-12-29 20:35:39 +01:00
adam closed this issue 2025-12-29 20:35:39 +01:00
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:35:40 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2023):

Is it possible for you to verify that 3.5.0 or 3.5.1 is also slow? Looking at the changes, 3.5.2 is the only release which has the upgraded graphene-django version (3.0.2) which broke the graphql explorer. It was reverted (to 3.0.0) in 3.5.3.

For context:

https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/12762
https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/12762#issuecomment-1569880855

Upgrading graphene-django would require fixing the graphql explorer, not that it's necessarily hard, someone just needs to do it.

@kkthxbye-code commented on GitHub (Jul 23, 2023): Is it possible for you to verify that 3.5.0 or 3.5.1 is also slow? Looking at the changes, 3.5.2 is the only release which has the upgraded graphene-django version (3.0.2) which broke the graphql explorer. It was reverted (to 3.0.0) in 3.5.3. For context: https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/12762 https://github.com/netbox-community/netbox/issues/12762#issuecomment-1569880855 Upgrading graphene-django would require fixing the graphql explorer, not that it's necessarily hard, someone just needs to do it.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:35:40 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@glesys-andreas commented on GitHub (Aug 21, 2023):

Ran the same test on a host running version 3.5.0 .
The query takes about 5 seconds with 1600 prefixes and with no other load on the system.

@glesys-andreas commented on GitHub (Aug 21, 2023): Ran the same test on a host running version 3.5.0 . The query takes about 5 seconds with 1600 prefixes and with no other load on the system.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:35:40 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 21, 2023):

@glesys-andreas have you been able to identify any changes that would improve performance?

This may become a moot point if we adopt Strawberry for v4.0 (see #9856).

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 21, 2023): @glesys-andreas have you been able to identify any changes that would improve performance? This may become a moot point if we adopt Strawberry for v4.0 (see #9856).
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:35:40 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@glesys-andreas commented on GitHub (Sep 25, 2023):

Hi, We are currently running 3.6.0 on our test environment and we are experiencing the same (slow) performance there.

Would be nice to see it implemented. We use the GraphQl API a lot so it would really make things a bit snappier :)

@glesys-andreas commented on GitHub (Sep 25, 2023): Hi, We are currently running 3.6.0 on our test environment and we are experiencing the same (slow) performance there. Would be nice to see it implemented. We use the GraphQl API a lot so it would really make things a bit snappier :)
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:35:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 25, 2023):

@glesys-andreas as we've been struggling to collect feedback on the potential migration, it may not happen. Could you please review #13583 and let us know what you think of the proposed change to the query syntax?

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Sep 25, 2023): @glesys-andreas as we've been struggling to collect feedback on the potential migration, it may not happen. Could you please review #13583 and let us know what you think of the proposed change to the query syntax?
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:35:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@glesys-andreas commented on GitHub (Sep 26, 2023):

@jeremystretch I've checked with our developers that builds the integrations. If you decide to switch there wont be any issue on our side, we'll just rewrite our scripts according to the new syntax.

@glesys-andreas commented on GitHub (Sep 26, 2023): @jeremystretch I've checked with our developers that builds the integrations. If you decide to switch there wont be any issue on our side, we'll just rewrite our scripts according to the new syntax.
adam commented 2025-12-29 20:35:41 +01:00
Author
Owner
Copy Link

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 22, 2023):

I'm going to close this out as no specific changes have been proposed. If anyone would like to continue researching potential optimizations, please feel free to do so, and submit a new issue detailing the specific changes to be made if you find something.

@jeremystretch commented on GitHub (Dec 22, 2023): I'm going to close this out as no specific changes have been proposed. If anyone would like to continue researching potential optimizations, please feel free to do so, and submit a new issue detailing the specific changes to be made if you find something.
Sign in to join this conversation.
No Branch/Tag Specified
Branches Tags
Labels
Clear labels
beta
breaking change
complexity: high
complexity: low
complexity: medium
needs milestone
netbox
pending closure
plugin candidate
pull-request
Mirrored from GitHub Pull Request
 severity: high
severity: low
severity: medium
status: accepted
status: backlog
status: blocked
status: duplicate
status: needs owner
status: needs triage
status: revisions needed
status: under review
topic: GraphQL
topic: Internationalization
topic: OpenAPI
topic: UI/UX
topic: cabling
topic: event rules
topic: htmx navigation
topic: industrialization
topic: migrations
topic: plugins
topic: scripts
topic: templating
topic: testing
type: bug
type: deprecation
type: documentation
type: feature
type: housekeeping
type: translation
No Label severity: medium status: needs owner type: bug
Milestone
No items
No Milestone
Projects
Clear projects
No project
Assignees
Clear assignees
adam
No Assignees
1 Participants
Notifications
Due Date
No due date set.
Dependencies

No dependencies set.

Reference: starred/netbox#8349
Delete Branch "%!s()"

Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?