-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.2k
Open
Description
Feature Request
If this is a feature request, please fill out the following form in full:
Describe the problem the feature is intended to solve
For now, tensorflow serving exports metrics by model like below.
...
:tensorflow:serving:request_count{model_name="test_model",status="OK"} 6
...
:tensorflow:serving:request_latency_bucket{model_name="test_model",API="predict",entrypoint="REST",le="10"} 0
:tensorflow:serving:request_latency_bucket{model_name="test_model",API="predict",entrypoint="REST",le="18"} 0
...
:tensorflow:serving:runtime_latency_bucket{model_name="test_model",API="Predict",runtime="TF1",le="10"} 0
:tensorflow:serving:runtime_latency_bucket{model_name="test_model",API="Predict",runtime="TF1",le="18"} 0
:tensorflow:serving:runtime_latency_bucket{model_name="test_model",API="Predict",runtime="TF1",le="32.4"} 0
...
We cannot collect metrics by signatures, even if the latencies of each signature are very different.
Related codes:
serving/tensorflow_serving/servables/tensorflow/util.h
Lines 118 to 119 in 21360c7
void RecordRuntimeLatency(const string& model_name, const string& api, const string& runtime, int64_t latency_usec); serving/tensorflow_serving/servables/tensorflow/util.h
Lines 122 to 123 in 21360c7
void RecordRequestLatency(const string& model_name, const string& api, const string& entrypoint, int64_t latency_usec);
Describe the solution
It must be better if runtime latency and request latency are recorded with signature names.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Additional context
Metadata
Metadata
Assignees
Type
Projects
Milestone
Relationships
Development
Select code repository
Activity
singhniraj08 commentedon Jun 8, 2023
@jeongukjae,
Are you still looking for a resolution? We are planning on prioritising the issues based on the community interests. Please let us know if this issue still persists with the latest TF Serving 1.12.1 release so that we can work on fixing it. Thank you for your contributions.
jeongukjae commentedon Jun 16, 2023
@singhniraj08 I wrote a PR for this issue #2152
I think those patches are enough for this. Can you review that?
singhniraj08 commentedon Jun 16, 2023
@jeongukjae, Thank you for your contributions. We will discuss this internally and update this thread. Thanks
jeongukjae commentedon Jun 22, 2023
@singhniraj08 Thank you.
+
I wrote another issue that is similar to this issue: #2157
Can you discuss that issue too internally?