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

feat(k6): add scenario with multiple stages ramping up/down RPS #6031

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: v2
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lc525
Copy link
Member

@lc525 lc525 commented Nov 6, 2024

The added scenario allows one to configure an arbitrary number of stages,
with each consisting of a linear ramp-up/down to the desired rate and a
hold/plateau time.

Within each stage, the duration for which the inference RPS is held constant
is configured via one element in the CONSTANT_RATE_DURATIONS_SECONDS
environment variable (a vector of comma separated values), with the ramp-up/
down duration preceding it being 1/3rd of the hold time.

Special notes for your reviewer:

  • scenario already used in HPA autoscaling testing & demo

The added scenario allows one to configure an arbitrary number of stages,
with each consisting of a linear ramp-up/down to the desired rate and a
hold/plateau time.

Within each stage, the duration for which the inference RPS is held constant
is configured via one element in the `CONSTANT_RATE_DURATIONS_SECONDS`
environment variable (a vector of comma separated values), with the ramp-up/
down duration preceding it being 1/3rd of the hold time.
@lc525 lc525 requested a review from sakoush as a code owner November 6, 2024 12:30
@lc525 lc525 added the v2 label Nov 6, 2024
Copy link
Member

@sakoush sakoush left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM. left a minor point.

doInfer(modelName, modelNameWithVersion, config, false, idx)
} else {
throw new Error('Both REST and GRPC protocols are disabled!')
}
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should we add the option to trigger applyModelReplicaChange as well in these tests?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes, I'll add that. Until now the data-plane tests and the control-plane tests were quite well separated, now I believe we should always have the option of some control-plane changes during the data-plane load test.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants