search

cloudfoundry / diego-release

BOSH Release for Diego
Apache License 2.0
201 stars 213 forks source link

[BBS] Application CPU assignment #886

Closed PlamenDoychev closed 4 months ago

PlamenDoychev commented 7 months ago

Extend CPU assignment for application instances which requests more than 8GB of memory

Summary

Currently CPU assignment to application instances is capped at 8GB instance memory. I.e.

<8GB_app_instance> => 2 CPU Cores guaranteed <16GB_app_instance> => 2 CPU Cores guaranteed This behavior is originally reported and documented in the following CAPI issue [#1178](https://github.com/cloudfoundry/cloud_controller_ng/issues/1178) long time ago. Nowadays more and more cases appear where customers want to push app instances greater than 8GB, hence to have more guaranteed CPU. Often in such cases the reason is not the memory itself but they simply need more CPU. Unfortunately, with the current capping between memory and CPU this is not possible. Once we implement this enhancement together with CAPI colleagues we should be able to assign CPU really according to the memory requested. I.e. <8GB_app_instance> => 2 CPU Cores guaranteed <16GB_app_instance> => 4 CPU Cores guaranteed <32GB_app_instance> => 8 CPU Cores guaranteed ## Diego repo https://github.com/cloudfoundry/bbs ## Additional Text Output, Screenshots, or contextual information (optional) This enhancement effort is shared between CAPI and Diego group. After a long discussion [#865](https://github.com/cloudfoundry/diego-release/issues/865), it has been decided that the majority of the implementation will be done in CAPI. CAPI colleagues created the following [#3588](https://github.com/cloudfoundry/cloud_controller_ng/issues/3588) in their backlog. Apparently they noticed that currently there is a validation in bbs which does not allow CPU weight to be greater than 100 [here](https://github.com/cloudfoundry/bbs/blob/0007fcda733509f73717fa966d8dcd8ff92ce62c/models/desired_lrp.go#L725-L727). In order to achieve better CPU assignment we should either remove or relax this validation.
MarcPaquette commented 5 months ago

Hey @geofffranks @ebroberson @PlamenDoychev & @winkingturtle-vmw,

What's the status of this work? Is there anything else that needs to be done to bring this to closure?

Thanks!

PlamenDoychev commented 4 months ago

Hi @MarcPaquette,

From my point of view it is completed it already hit our staging landscapes and i tested it.

PlamenDoychev commented 4 months ago

Closing the issue as completed and tested.