# `ports_profiler`

This tool counts and reports the number of times each port in the procedure box model is traversed during the execution of queries. It is inspired by the ECLiPSe `port_profiler` tool.

The procedure box model is the same used in the debugger tool. This is an extended version of the original Byrd’s four port model. Besides the standard `call`, `exit`, `fail`, and `redo` ports, Logtalk also defines two post-unification ports, `fact` and `rule`, and an `exception` port. This tool can also distinguishes between deterministic exits (reported in the `exit` column in the profiling result tables) and exits that leave choice-points (reported in the `*exit` column).

## API documentation

This tool API documentation is available at:

../../docs/library_index.html#ports-profiler

For sample queries, please see the `SCRIPT.txt` file in the tool directory.

## Loading

    | ?- logtalk_load(ports_profiler(loader)).

Note that this tool cannot be loaded at the same time as other tools (e.g. the debugger) that also provide a debug handler, which must be unique in a running session.

## Testing

To test this tool, load the `tester.lgt` file:

    | ?- logtalk_load(ports_profiler(tester)).

## Compiling source files for port profiling

To compile source files for port profiling, simply compile them in debug mode and with the `source_data` flag turned on. For example:

    | ?- logtalk_load(my_source_file, [debug(on), source_data(on)]).

Alternatively, you can also simply turn on the `debug` and `source_data` flags globally before compiling your source files:

    | ?- set_logtalk_flag(debug, on), set_logtalk_flag(source_data, on).

Be aware, however, that loader files (e.g. library loader files) may override default flag values and thus loaded files may not be compiled in debug mode. In this case, you will need to modify the loader files themselves.

## Generating profiling data

After loading this tool and compiling the source files that you want to profile in debug mode, simply call the goals to be profiled.

## Printing profiling data reports

After calling the goals that you want to profile, you can print a table with all profile data by typing:

    | ?- ports_profiler::data.

To print a table with data for a single entity, use the query:

    | ?- ports_profiler::data(Entity).

The profiling data can be reset using the query:

    | ?- ports_profiler::reset.

To reset only the data about a specific entity, use the query:

    | ?- ports_profiler::reset(Entity).

To illustrate the tool output, consider the `family` example in the Logtalk distribution:

    | ?- {ports_profiler(loader)}.
    ...
    yes

    | ?- set_logtalk_flag(debug, on).
    yes

    | ?- logtalk_load(family(loader)).
    ...
    yes

    | ?- addams::sister(Sister, Sibling).
    Sister = wednesday,
    Sibling = pubert ;
    Sister = wednesday,
    Sibling = pugsley ;
    Sister = wednesday,
    Sibling = pubert ;
    Sister = wednesday,
    Sibling = pugsley ;
    no

    | ?- ports_profiler::data.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    Entity      Predicate    Fact  Rule  Call  Exit *Exit  Fail  Redo Error
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    addams      female/1        2     0     1     1     1     0     1     0
    addams      parent/2        8     0     4     3     5     1     5     0
    familytree  sister/2        0     1     1     0     4     1     4     0
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    yes

## Interpreting profiling data

Some useful information that can be inferred from the profiling data include:

- which predicates are called more often (from the `call` port)

- unexpected failures (from the `fail` port)

- unwanted non-determinism (from the `*exit` port)

- performance issues due to backtracking (from the `*exit` and `redo` ports)

- predicates acting like a generator of possible solutions (from the `*exit` and `redo` ports)

- inefficient indexing of predicate clauses (from the `fact`, `rule`, and `call` ports)

The profiling data should be analyzed taking into account the expected behavior for the profiled predicates.

## Profiling Prolog modules

This tool can also be applied to Prolog modules that Logtalk is able to compile as objects. For example, if the Prolog module file is named `module.pl`, try:

    | ?- logtalk_load(module, [debug(on), source_data(on)]).

Due to the lack of standardization of module systems and the abundance of proprietary extensions, this solution is not expected to work for all cases.

## Profiling plain Prolog code

This tool can also be applied to plain Prolog code. For example, if the Prolog file is named `code.pl`, simply define an object including its code and declaring as public any predicates that you want to use as messages to the object. For example:

    :- object(code).

        :- public(foo/2).
        :- include('code.pl').

    :- end_object.

Save the object to an e.g. `code.lgt` file in the same directory as the Prolog file and then load it in debug mode:

    | ?- logtalk_load(code, [debug(on), source_data(on)]).

In alternative, use the `object_wrapper_hook` provided by the `hook_objects` library:

    | ?- logtalk_load([os(loader), hook_objects(object_wrapper_hook)]).
    ...

    | ?- logtalk_load(
             code,
             [hook(object_wrapper_hook), debug(on),
              source_data(on), context_switching_calls(allow)]
         ).

In this second alternative, you can then use the `(<<)/2` context switch control construct to call the wrapped predicates. E.g.

    | ?- code<<foo(X, Y).

With either wrapping solution, pay special attention to any compilation warnings that may signal issues that could prevent the plain Prolog code of working as-is when wrapped by an object. Often any required changes are straight-forward (e.g. adding `use_module/2` directives for called module library predicates).

## Known issues

Determinism information is currently not available when using Lean Prolog or Quintus Prolog as backend compilers.