----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33106/ -----------------------------------------------------------
Review request for Aurora and Maxim Khutornenko. Repository: aurora Description ------- This removes the Supplier/memoize behavior in `AttributeAggregate`, performing all aggregation up front. Diffs ----- src/jmh/java/org/apache/aurora/benchmark/SchedulingBenchmarks.java ce87344dc18818faa7a1a0298143dcaaaa81fff7 src/main/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/filter/AttributeAggregate.java ed82ae99f23d5a7f1634261205cbe5339fe4cec8 src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/async/TaskSchedulerImplTest.java c5643d9d99fc46d55fd6c48161230139fb7f12b8 src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/async/TaskSchedulerTest.java 88c0163170ebc25995d9ef8b1543335a4322bb8e src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/async/preemptor/PendingTaskProcessorTest.java bcd1b4e854f5ea227268c73156bc97c7c937c1de src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/async/preemptor/PreemptorImplTest.java 281f4e02650727aa5d0a35a09dcf0eb823ad1b50 src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/async/preemptor/PreemptorModuleTest.java 7e2d1c54362b33cc3507a4bc3e3ccc02ca29bd6f src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/async/preemptor/PreemptorSlotFinderTest.java b80e558f18b817814e4768b13ff94aa816d28543 src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/events/NotifyingSchedulingFilterTest.java 61cea326ababcd6242a3c5a6dcf8d0b3ca7fbdd6 src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/filter/AttributeAggregateTest.java 4b565769d79862326efcb31be694f95f333c89c6 src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/filter/SchedulingFilterImplTest.java d06b89cc319aa7b4479124cbb2cb224cdb662e05 src/test/java/org/apache/aurora/scheduler/state/TaskAssignerImplTest.java aca0234e037e85202d182affa2c0e988c6cfc854 Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33106/diff/ Testing ------- See diff of relevant benchmark sections below (top section is master, bottom is with this patch). As should be expected, performance declines in two scenarios that did not 'pull' the `Supplier`: - there are no resource offers - the task only has value constraints (therefore unaffected by state of the rest of the job) I argue that in practice, these scenarios (no offers, value-only constraints) are rare enough to not be worth the code complexity. ``` < SchedulingBenchmarks.ClusterFullUtilizationBenchmark.runBenchmark N/A N/A thrpt 10 593015.942 ± 5782.045 ops/s < SchedulingBenchmarks.InsufficientResourcesSchedulingBenchmark.runBenchmark N/A N/A thrpt 10 44781.172 ± 306.152 ops/s < SchedulingBenchmarks.LimitConstraintMismatchSchedulingBenchmark.runBenchmark N/A N/A thrpt 10 3397.620 ± 35.340 ops/s < SchedulingBenchmarks.PreemptorSlotSearchBenchmark.runBenchmark N/A N/A thrpt 10 240.376 ± 6.679 ops/s < SchedulingBenchmarks.ValueConstraintMismatchSchedulingBenchmark.runBenchmark N/A N/A thrpt 10 44435.419 ± 291.268 ops/s --- > SchedulingBenchmarks.ClusterFullUtilizationBenchmark.runBenchmark > N/A N/A thrpt 10 181543.224 ± 2313.677 ops/s > SchedulingBenchmarks.InsufficientResourcesSchedulingBenchmark.runBenchmark > N/A N/A thrpt 10 35623.691 ± 303.796 ops/s > SchedulingBenchmarks.LimitConstraintMismatchSchedulingBenchmark.runBenchmark > N/A N/A thrpt 10 3318.727 ± 19.131 ops/s > SchedulingBenchmarks.PreemptorSlotSearchBenchmark.runBenchmark > N/A N/A thrpt 10 235.248 ± 5.928 ops/s > SchedulingBenchmarks.ValueConstraintMismatchSchedulingBenchmark.runBenchmark > N/A N/A thrpt 10 35468.747 ± 293.517 ops/s ``` Thanks, Bill Farner
