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

[serve] Use placement groups to bypass autoscaler throttling #13844

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Mar 10, 2021

Conversation

edoakes
Copy link
Contributor

@edoakes edoakes commented Feb 1, 2021

Why are these changes needed?

Creates a placement group for each actor to bypass the autoscaler's throttling in autoscaling clusters.

Also removes the resource check now that we can gracefully handle incrementally scaling backends. I added a warning message that will print when backends take a long time to startup to avoid user confusion if things "just hang."

Related issue number

Checks

  • I've run scripts/format.sh to lint the changes in this PR.
  • I've included any doc changes needed for https://docs.ray.io/en/master/.
  • I've made sure the tests are passing. Note that there might be a few flaky tests, see the recent failures at https://flakey-tests.ray.io/
  • Testing Strategy
    • Unit tests
    • Release tests
    • This PR is not tested :(

@edoakes edoakes changed the title [WIP] [serve] Use placement groups to bypass autoscaler throttling [serve] Use placement groups to bypass autoscaler throttling Feb 9, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@ijrsvt ijrsvt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks good!

Copy link
Contributor

@simon-mo simon-mo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This means we are turning off admission control in create_backend right? Anyway to update the documentation about this or some sort of create_backend(_creation_timeout=...) so it won't block?

@edoakes
Copy link
Contributor Author

edoakes commented Feb 10, 2021

@simon-mo yeah that's right. I think we should add a top-level flag that toggles whether we block on the operation or not.

@edoakes
Copy link
Contributor Author

edoakes commented Feb 10, 2021

FYI waiting to merge this because it causes a bunch of spam about the actors not being schedulable due to a placement group implementation detail (cc @rkooo567)

@edoakes edoakes merged commit 8111ff5 into ray-project:master Mar 10, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants