bdoyle0182 commented on issue #5510: URL: https://github.com/apache/openwhisk/issues/5510#issuecomment-2356474466
> 3. But when I ran benchmarking for another action B after A, the warm containers were not used. Even though both A and B use same runtimes, same amount of memory and same requirements for pip. > > So I think the warm containers not being used amongst different actions is what's causing my workflows to not scale. I saw invoker tags based scheduling in the docs and that is some temporary fix for my use case, that is in 2.0.0 and not 1.0.0. > > But bigger concern is my limited understanding of warm containers reuse amongst different actions. Where do I get more information about this? Is this the intentional way warm containers reuse is supposed to run? You're experiencing the hot spotting / container swapping problem of the best effort 1.0.0 scheduling algorithm. If you're container pool is full and no functions exist for Action B, you need to evict an Action A in order to cold start an Action B. But also want to clarify that you shouldn't expect containers to get reused for multiple actions. Once a container is bound to an action, it can only run executions of that action even if it's using the same runtime and memory profile; there are many reasons for this but most importantly is security and data isolation. You will find that performance should be significantly better on Openwhisk 2.0 with the new scheduler for the traffic pattern you're trying to test. -- 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]
