Ah, yes, that works too. The slaves/meta-slaves then simulate the running of the tasks. Such a meta-slave would be useful within Mesosaurus. In general, Mesosaurus sounds like a very useful tool. I had developed a similar tool at a prior job and we had tuned scheduling algorithms, SLA policies, and runtime configurations for large scale environments. It helps build confidence in replacing the scheduler in a running cluster.
On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 3:17 PM, Benjamin Mahler <[email protected]>wrote: > You can run N slaves on one machine, or you can run meta-slaves (slaves > within slaves). We've used meta-slaves in the past to run scaling > simulations as it is more accurate and easier than stubbing out the task > launching. > > > On Fri, Mar 21, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Sharma Podila <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Am I interpreting things right that in order to simulate/benchmark >> scheduling algorithms working in, say, a 100-slave cluster, although this >> tool generates the jobs, the slaves need to actually exist and run the >> tasks (I see there is mesosaurus / task /mesosaurus-task.cpp)? If so, have >> you considered "stub"ing out Mesos' launching of tasks such that launched >> tasks don't need to physically run? This could allow >> simulating/benchmarking arbitrary size clusters since scheduling algorithms >> don't need tasks to run physically. The scheduler just needs to be told >> when tasks finish. >> >> Sharma >> >> >> On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 7:57 AM, Tobias Knaup <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> We started working on a load simulator/benchmark tool for Mesos. The >>> idea is to use this tool to simulate typical workloads in a reproducible >>> way so we can test different scheduling algorithms, reservations, etc. >>> Would love to hear what you think, and see contributions of course :) >>> https://github.com/mesosphere/mesosaurus >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Tobi >>> >> >> >
