Improve benchmark performance of nodenumber wasm plugin #127
+20
−5
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
k8s-ci-robot
added
kind/cleanup
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
size/S
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jgiannuzzi, sanposhiho The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
The
nodenumberWASM plugin used in the scheduler_perf benchmark doesn't use advanced techniques like the custom GC and advertising only the implemented endpoints.By adopting these techniques and rebuilding the WASM module, the benchmark suggests that the WASM plugin performance is between the native code and the extender, whilst it was slower than the extender before this change.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Special notes for your reviewer:
I have also changed the location of the WASM module in the
AllEnabledprofile, as it was pointing to thenodenumberexample rather than the one we build for the benchmark.Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
What are the benchmark results of this change?
Running the
scheduler_perfbenchmark 3 times on the same machine and taking the average of the results for scheduling 10000 pods, this results in a ~10% increase, going from 750 pods/s to 833 pods/s.