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

[data] allow ConcurrencyCapBackpressurePolicy._cap_multiplier to be set to 1.0 #41222

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 20, 2023

Conversation

raulchen
Copy link
Contributor

Why are these changes needed?

Allow ConcurrencyCapBackpressurePolicy._cap_multiplier to be set to 1.0. This means that the concurrency will stay the same. No ramping up. This is because for some workloads, we need an upper bound of concurrency cap to make it stable. Before introducing new configs for control concurrency. Add this as a temporary workaround.

Related issue number

#41193

Checks

  • I've signed off every commit(by using the -s flag, i.e., git commit -s) in this PR.
  • 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 added any new APIs to the API Reference. For example, if I added a
      method in Tune, I've added it in doc/source/tune/api/ under the
      corresponding .rst file.
  • 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 :(

Signed-off-by: Hao Chen <chenh1024@gmail.com>
@raulchen raulchen merged commit 43d93f6 into ray-project:master Nov 20, 2023
19 checks passed
@raulchen raulchen deleted the concurrency-cap-multiplier branch November 20, 2023 22:45
ujjawal-khare pushed a commit to ujjawal-khare-27/ray that referenced this pull request Nov 29, 2023
…et to 1.0 (ray-project#41222)

Allow ConcurrencyCapBackpressurePolicy._cap_multiplier to be set to 1.0. This means that the concurrency will stay the same. No ramping up. This is because for some workloads, we need an upper bound of concurrency cap to make it stable. Before introducing new configs for control concurrency. Add this as a temporary workaround.
---------

Signed-off-by: Hao Chen <chenh1024@gmail.com>
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

4 participants