> On Sept. 11, 2018, 8:17 p.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_benchmarks.cpp > > Lines 378 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68591/diff/2/?file=2088300#file2088300line378> > > > > As I mentioned in the previous patch, it is confusing here that the > > test needs to resume the allocator even it did not pause it. The test will > > control the clock, and that should be enough for it to dictate the test > > progress.
That was an oversight. Thanks for the catch > On Sept. 11, 2018, 8:17 p.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_benchmarks.cpp > > Lines 409-411 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68591/diff/2/?file=2088300#file2088300line409> > > > > We might as well `unallocate` the offered resources instead of > > allocating the `taskResources`, both are not ideal, but with the former, we > > at least save some writes: > > > > ``` > > Resources remainingResources = offer.resources; > > const Resources& taskResources = > > frameworkTaskResources.at(offer.frameworkId); > > > > // We strip allocation information of `remainingResources` so that we > > // can compare/subtract with `taskResources`. > > remainingResources.unallocate(); > > > > ``` We need to "reallocate" before calling allocator to recover. But yeah, it saves some writes. > On Sept. 11, 2018, 8:17 p.m., Meng Zhu wrote: > > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_benchmarks.cpp > > Lines 436-437 (patched) > > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/68591/diff/2/?file=2088300#file2088300line436> > > > > in << ... << allocation rounds/cycles That was a weird mix of wordings. I have updated the patch to address some of that. - Kapil ----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/68591/#review208533 ----------------------------------------------------------- On Sept. 13, 2018, 4:25 p.m., Kapil Arya wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/68591/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Sept. 13, 2018, 4:25 p.m.) > > > Review request for mesos, Meng Zhu and Till Toenshoff. > > > Bugs: MESOS-9187 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-9187 > > > Repository: mesos > > > Description > ------- > > This tests measures allocation performance with non-uniform framework > characteristics. Each framework profile launches a different number of > tasks with different task sizes. > > > Diffs > ----- > > src/tests/hierarchical_allocator_benchmarks.cpp PRE-CREATION > > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/68591/diff/3/ > > > Testing > ------- > > ``` > [ RUN ] HierarchicalAllocations_BENCHMARK_TestBase.Allocations > Added 80 agents in 17.162452ms > Added 554 frameworks in 220.842289ms > Start allocation > Launched 790 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 1 with 80 offers and > took 171.384046ms > Launched 1165 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 2 with 79 offers and > took 177.912018ms > Launched 1255 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 3 with 78 offers and > took 184.146219ms > Launched 1340 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 4 with 77 offers and > took 189.107347ms > Launched 1425 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 5 with 76 offers and > took 187.070715ms > Launched 1510 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 6 with 75 offers and > took 187.07625ms > Launched 1595 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 7 with 74 offers and > took 186.33422ms > Launched 1665 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 8 with 73 offers and > took 183.589366ms > Launched 1745 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 9 with 72 offers and > took 180.402905ms > Launched 1815 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 10 with 71 offers and > took 180.515393ms > Launched 1895 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 11 with 70 offers and > took 180.966979ms > Launched 1965 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 12 with 69 offers and > took 176.934459ms > Launched 2005 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 13 with 68 offers and > took 187.481368ms > Launched 2055 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 14 with 67 offers and > took 183.099878ms > Launched 2095 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 15 with 66 offers and > took 173.505944ms > Launched 2135 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 16 with 65 offers and > took 181.777422ms > Launched 2175 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 17 with 64 offers and > took 175.975485ms > Launched 2205 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 18 with 63 offers and > took 174.766299ms > Launched 2225 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 19 with 62 offers and > took 173.047727ms > Launched 2235 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 20 with 61 offers and > took 178.637012ms > Launched 2245 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 21 with 60 offers and > took 176.6152ms > Launched 2255 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 22 with 59 offers and > took 171.762635ms > Launched 2265 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 23 with 58 offers and > took 173.781849ms > Launched 2275 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 24 with 57 offers and > took 173.308192ms > Launched 2285 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 25 with 56 offers and > took 167.873817ms > Launched 2295 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 26 with 55 offers and > took 167.150833ms > Launched 2305 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 27 with 54 offers and > took 165.603318ms > Launched 2315 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 28 with 53 offers and > took 165.629372ms > Launched 2315 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 29 with 52 offers and > took 163.471809ms > ... > Launched 2315 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 530 with 0 offers and > took 110.898635ms > Launched 2315 tasks out of 19500 total tasks in round 531 with 0 offers and > took 113.201834ms > Failed to launch all tasks: Timed out after 1mins > Resource statistics: > Cluster capacity: cpus:5120; mem:39040000 > Cluster allocation: cpus:1093.4; mem:1688000 > Target allocation: cpus:2370; mem:17400000 > [ OK ] HierarchicalAllocations_BENCHMARK_TestBase.Allocations (60321 ms) > ``` > > > Thanks, > > Kapil Arya > >