-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3.8k
feat: CBA idle re-modeling and separate scale-up / scale-down task-count boundaries #19378
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
e38fbb6
0266cb3
df864db
e367f87
9efa91d
5b61b6d
3f7dcf1
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
|
|
@@ -143,7 +143,7 @@ public void test_autoScaler_computesOptimalTaskCountAndProducesScaleUp() | |
| } | ||
| }); | ||
|
|
||
| // These values were carefully handpicked to allow that test to pass in a stable manner. | ||
| // These values were carefully handpicked to allow that test to pass stably. | ||
| final CostBasedAutoScalerConfig autoScalerConfig = CostBasedAutoScalerConfig | ||
| .builder() | ||
| .enableTaskAutoScaler(true) | ||
|
|
@@ -152,8 +152,8 @@ public void test_autoScaler_computesOptimalTaskCountAndProducesScaleUp() | |
| .taskCountStart(lowInitialTaskCount) | ||
| .scaleActionPeriodMillis(500) | ||
| .minTriggerScaleActionFrequencyMillis(1000) | ||
| .lagWeight(0.2) | ||
| .idleWeight(0.8) | ||
| .lagWeight(0.8) | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. What will be the effect of the change to lag and idle weights?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It was passing without any problems in normal circumstances. The main idea of the change is to reduce the potential of not scaling over the timeout due to CI CPU pressure. |
||
| .idleWeight(0.2) | ||
| .build(); | ||
|
|
||
| final KafkaSupervisorSpec kafkaSupervisorSpec = createKafkaSupervisorWithAutoScaler( | ||
|
|
@@ -192,11 +192,11 @@ public void test_autoScaler_scalesUpAndDown_withSlowPublish() | |
|
|
||
| final CostBasedAutoScalerConfig autoScalerConfig = CostBasedAutoScalerConfig | ||
| .builder() | ||
| .enableTaskAutoScaler(true) | ||
| .taskCountMin(1) | ||
| .taskCountMax(4) | ||
| .lagWeight(1.0) | ||
| .idleWeight(1.0) | ||
| .enableTaskAutoScaler(true) | ||
| .lagWeight(0.5) | ||
| .idleWeight(0.5) | ||
| .minTriggerScaleActionFrequencyMillis(10L) | ||
| .scaleActionPeriodMillis(10L) | ||
| .minScaleDownDelay(Duration.standardSeconds(1)) | ||
|
|
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is it really in progress?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I need to verify if anybody have a Kinesis workload with CBA working. If you want, we can remove that part.