Slow Automatic World Bootstrap when using [UpdateInGroup],[UpdateAfter] and [UpdateBefore]

Hello,

We are using multiple systems (around 100) using [UpdateInGroup],[UpdateAfter] and [UpdateBefore] and we found that the automatic world bootstrap is very slow (more than 5 minutes).
After multiple tests we found that this part of the ScriptBehaviourUpdateOrder is very slow :

Code (CSharp):

1. // Validate that the chains are not over constrained with combinations of system and engine dependencies
2.             foreach (var typeAndSystem in dependencyGraph)
3.             {
4.                 var system = typeAndSystem.Value;
5.                 if (system.UpdateBefore.Count == 0)
6.                     ValidateAndFixSingleChainMaxPos(system, dependencyGraph, system.MaxInsertPos);
7.                 if (system.UpdateAfter.Count == 0)
8.                     ValidateAndFixSingleChainMinPos(system, dependencyGraph, system.MinInsertPos);
9.             }

We also think that Injected Barrier Systems may worsen the problem.

Are there any guidelines about that ?

 

This was discussed a while.

Basically at the moment, adding UpdateAfter and UpdateBefore gets exponentially more expensive.

I think from memory only using 1 type (only UpdateAfter or only UpdateBefore) is significantly better, but in general I think you should avoid using them except for very specific cases.

1 frame delay on certain updates is really not an issue a lot of the time and having dozens or even hundreds of update attributes becomes unmanageable.

-edit-

here we go, dug up some posts.

Discussion on this and why the performance is so bad (and the linear solution).

https://forum.unity.com/threads/tak...ymode-be-mindful-of-your-updateorders.543283/

Also it's going to be changed

https://forum.unity.com/threads/update-interval.523628/#post-3610044

-edit2-

My personal hope we have a simple integer order.

[UpdateOrder(1)]
[UpdateOrder(-3)]
[UpdateOrder(4)]

Solves order and grouping without any magic behind it.

Basically how unity works atm.

 

Thanks, we will try to find a way to make it works.