From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: <f.ebner@proxmox.com> Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6BA2A9B23 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 12:32:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4683937E4B for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 12:32:29 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com [94.136.29.106]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 12:32:28 +0100 (CET) Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E678A44D21 for <pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Fri, 18 Nov 2022 12:32:27 +0100 (CET) From: Fiona Ebner <f.ebner@proxmox.com> To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 12:32:20 +0100 Message-Id: <20221118113223.49305-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.30.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: =?UTF-8?Q?0=0A=09?=AWL 0.027 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: =?UTF-8?Q?address=0A=09?=BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict =?UTF-8?Q?Alignment=0A=09?=SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF =?UTF-8?Q?Record=0A=09?=SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF =?UTF-8?Q?record=0A=09?=URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [manager.pm, pvect.pm, pve2.pm, resources.pm, env.pm, pvevm.pm, static.pm] Subject: [pve-devel] [RFC ha-manager] make static usage calculation faster X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion <pve-devel.lists.proxmox.com> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/> List-Post: <mailto:pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com> List-Help: <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pve-devel>, <mailto:pve-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe> X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 11:32:29 -0000 by avoiding overhead from load_config(). Benchmarked recompute_online_node_usage() again with ~300 HA services (minimal containers) running on my virtual test cluster. Timings with 'basic' were between 0.0004 - 0.002 seconds (a bit worse today than last time) Timings before these patches were between 0.007 - 0.016 seconds (also a bit worse than last time) Timings after these patches were between 0.0035 - 0.006 seconds So only about twice as fast unfortunately. Reducing the number of recompute_online_node_usage() calls might be necessary after all. Probably not worth applying, as this didn't get much testing and is not a huge improvement :/ Fiona Ebner (3): resources: get static stats: add cache parameter env: add get_static_guest_stats method manager/usage: cache static service stats to avoid overhead src/PVE/HA/Env.pm | 6 ++++++ src/PVE/HA/Env/PVE2.pm | 15 +++++++++++++++ src/PVE/HA/Manager.pm | 1 + src/PVE/HA/Resources.pm | 2 +- src/PVE/HA/Resources/PVECT.pm | 5 +++-- src/PVE/HA/Resources/PVEVM.pm | 6 ++++-- src/PVE/HA/Sim/Env.pm | 7 +++++++ src/PVE/HA/Sim/Resources.pm | 2 +- src/PVE/HA/Usage/Static.pm | 13 ++++++++++--- 9 files changed, 48 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-) -- 2.30.2