bdoyle0182 commented on PR #5229: URL: https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/pull/5229#issuecomment-1204220026
Before you merge I just have one last comment to discuss on naming with my separate poem on giving users the ability to configure max container / "server" concurrency, which I currently have to be `maxContainerConcurrency` as a field in the limits section of an action document. I've named it this way because there is already `concurrency` in the limits section for max concurrent requests within an individual container / "server". I suspect we will add a similar configuration to this feature for a namespace to allow a min and max container concurrency setting to be allowed to be configured per action within a namespace. Since in this pr the configuration to control max and min of concurrent requests per container is `maxActionConcurrency` So I think we've gotten to the point where we have many concurrency knobs and it's getting confusing in naming. 1. `concurrentInvocations` on the namespace global limit which represents the total containers that can be up at once, which isn't really representative of the semantics of that limit anymore since you can have more concurrent invocations than the set value. 2. `concurrency` as a limit on the action document which represents max requests that a single container for an action can handle at once. 3. `maxActionConcurrency` defined in this pr which represents the min and max defined as namespace limits of a window of what values can be configured for 2. 4. `maxContainerConcurrency` defined in my poem which is also a limit on the action document like 2. but represents the max containers that can be running for that action at once such that max throughput for an action is then 2. * 4. If we were to add lower and upper limits in the same vein for my new `maxContainerConcurrency` value here, what would we name it. `maxContainerConcurrency` and `minContainerConcurrency`. Should I then rename the limit defined in the action document to then just be `containerConcurrency` rather than include `max`? Don't want to hang up this pr much more as I know it's been sitting for awhile just want to make sure we get the naming right as the concurrency knobs are the most important for controlling the system and I don't want it to be confusing for new users or even existing users that see these new configurations. Does `maxActionConcurrency` and `maxContainerConcurrency` feel adequately different in name and actually representative of what these limits do? -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
