Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

metrics: use milliseconds instead of microseconds as the time unit for scheduling latency #3548

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 7, 2024
Merged

metrics: use milliseconds instead of microseconds as the time unit for scheduling latency #3548

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 7, 2024

Conversation

microyahoo
Copy link
Contributor

The current time unit cannot accurately reflect the actual scheduling time like below

volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="5"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="10"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="20"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="40"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="80"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="160"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="320"} 1
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="640"} 1
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="1280"} 68550
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="2560"} 198253
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="+Inf"} 243524
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_sum{action="allocate"} 5.505664439029926e+08

Signed-off-by: Liang Zheng zhengliang0901@gmail.com

@volcano-sh-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @microyahoo!

It looks like this is your first PR to volcano-sh/volcano.

Thank you, and welcome to Volcano. 😃

@volcano-sh-bot volcano-sh-bot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jun 27, 2024
@microyahoo
metrics: Use milliseconds instead of microseconds as the time unit fo…
2b9b3dd 
…r scheduling latency

The current time unit cannot accurately reflect the actual scheduling time like below
```
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="5"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="10"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="20"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="40"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="80"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="160"} 0
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="320"} 1
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="640"} 1
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="1280"} 68550
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="2560"} 198253
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_bucket{action="allocate",le="+Inf"} 243524
volcano_action_scheduling_latency_microseconds_sum{action="allocate"} 5.505664439029926e+08
```

Signed-off-by: Liang Zheng <zhengliang0901@gmail.com>
@microyahoo microyahoo changed the title metrics: Use milliseconds instead of microseconds as the time unit for scheduling latency metrics: use milliseconds instead of microseconds as the time unit for scheduling latency Jun 27, 2024
@lowang-bh
Copy link
Member

Shall we mark it deprecated first and then remove it after several releases?

@microyahoo
Copy link
Contributor Author

Shall we mark it deprecated first and then remove it after several releases?

hi @lowang-bh, thanks for your quick response. There is also another workaround that doesn't introduce a breaking change; we just need to modify the exponential bucket count to cover a wider range.

@lowang-bh
Copy link
Member

@Monokaix please take a look.

@Monokaix
Copy link
Member

What's the problem of using microseconds?

@microyahoo
Copy link
Contributor Author

microyahoo commented Jul 11, 2024 •
edited

What's the problem of using microseconds?

hi @Vacant2333, if microseconds are used, the maximum range of the bucket is 2.56ms. Values greater than 2.56ms will all fall into this bucket, which does not reflect the actual scheduling latency.

@Vacant2333
Copy link
Contributor

What's the problem of using microseconds?

hi @Vacant2333, if microseconds are used, the maximum range of the bucket is 2.56ms. Values greater than 2.56ms will all fall into this bucket, which does not reflect the actual scheduling latency.

I want to know how you @mentioned me; I have no connection to this PR.

@Monokaix
Copy link
Member

What's the problem of using microseconds?

hi @Vacant2333, if microseconds are used, the maximum range of the bucket is 2.56ms. Values greater than 2.56ms will all fall into this bucket, which does not reflect the actual scheduling latency.

I want to know how you @mentioned me; I have no connection to this PR.

I think he's pointing me: )

@Monokaix
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@volcano-sh-bot volcano-sh-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 12, 2024
@microyahoo
Copy link
Contributor Author

What's the problem of using microseconds?

hi @Vacant2333, if microseconds are used, the maximum range of the bucket is 2.56ms. Values greater than 2.56ms will all fall into this bucket, which does not reflect the actual scheduling latency.

I want to know how you @mentioned me; I have no connection to this PR.

sorry, my mistake @Vacant2333

@microyahoo
Copy link
Contributor Author

hi @lowang-bh @hudson741 @Thor-wl, PTAL, thanks.

@lowang-bh
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@lowang-bh
Copy link
Member

/ok-to-test

@volcano-sh-bot volcano-sh-bot added the ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. label Jul 14, 2024
@lowang-bh lowang-bh mentioned this pull request Jul 20, 2024
Closed
william-wang
william-wang approved these changes Aug 7, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@william-wang william-wang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/approve

@volcano-sh-bot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: william-wang

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@volcano-sh-bot volcano-sh-bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 7, 2024
@volcano-sh-bot volcano-sh-bot merged commit ab23490 into volcano-sh:master Aug 7, 2024
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@william-wang william-wang william-wang approved these changes

@hudson741 hudson741 Awaiting requested review from hudson741

@Thor-wl Thor-wl Awaiting requested review from Thor-wl

Assignees

@william-wang william-wang

@Monokaix Monokaix

@lowang-bh lowang-bh

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
6 participants
@microyahoo @volcano-sh-bot @lowang-bh @Monokaix @Vacant2333 @william-wang