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.

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

Processing Rate calculation optimization #788

Closed
KeranYang opened this issue Jun 12, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #810
Closed

Processing Rate calculation optimization #788

KeranYang opened this issue Jun 12, 2023 · 0 comments · Fixed by #810
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Milestone

Comments

@KeranYang
Copy link
Member

Currently to calculate the processing rate of a vertex, we sum the count deltas between each of the timestamp interval pairs, which is an O(length of look back period) operation. If we assume no pod crash, then we can view the count-to-time relationship as a slop and quickly estimate the processing rate by only using the first and last data points. Rate = delta(count)/delta(t)

Considering that in PROD pod crash is a rare case, we can further assume within a single lookback period, the number of pod crash is constant. In that case, if we keep track of under which timestamp a pod crash was detected, then we just need 3 data points to calculate rates, first, last and the one when the pod crashed. This can be an O(3) operation.

This task is to investigate and experiment on this approach and see if it works in practice.


Message from the maintainers:

If you wish to see this enhancement implemented please add a 👍 reaction to this issue! We often sort issues this way to know what to prioritize.

@KeranYang KeranYang added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 12, 2023
@vigith vigith added this to the v0.9 milestone Jul 7, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants