From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: 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 B6DDF8894 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 10:10:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 67EA81C790 for ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 10:09:49 +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 ; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 10:09:48 +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 766AB44AE5; Wed, 16 Nov 2022 10:09:46 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 10:09:45 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.3.0 Content-Language: en-US To: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com, "DERUMIER, Alexandre" References: <20221110143800.98047-1-f.ebner@proxmox.com> <20221110143800.98047-2-f.ebner@proxmox.com> From: Fiona Ebner In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: =?UTF-8?Q?0=0A=09?=AWL 0.028 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?=NICE_REPLY_A -0.001 Looks like a legit reply (A) 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. [proxmox.com] Subject: Re: [pve-devel] [PATCH proxmox-resource-scheduling 1/3] initial commit X-BeenThere: pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2022 09:10:19 -0000 Am 15.11.22 um 16:39 schrieb DERUMIER, Alexandre: > Thanks Fiona for your hard work on this ! > > I'm going to review/test them this week. > > I'm not an expert in Rust, but I think I'll be able to read the code > Thank you for pushing the idea in the first place! Let's hope we can re-use this infrastructure to get to a real dynamic balancer down the line :) > > Just a question, how do you choose the weight of different criteria ? > > I think in the second patch, I see: > > + static ref PVE_HA_TOPSIS_CRITERIA: TopsisCriteria = > TopsisCriteria::new([ > + TopsisCriterion::new("average CPU".to_string(), -1.0), > + TopsisCriterion::new("highest CPU".to_string(), -2.0), > + TopsisCriterion::new("average memory".to_string(), -5.0), > + TopsisCriterion::new("highest memory".to_string(), -10.0), > + ]) > > > Is is arbitrary values ? Yes, it's arbitrary. Thomas suggested that memory should be much more important, because it's "hard" limited compared to CPU time. Average will mostly be relevant when there is already a highly-commited node. Not overcommitting nodes in the first place should take precedence over that of course, so highest is more important than average. > > if you look at my previous patch series, > https://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pve-devel/2022-April/052779.html > > I have also implement the AHP algo. (from AHP-TOPSIS), which is really > usefull to find weights for criteria, when you begin to have a lot of > criterias, giving priority in a matrix between each criterias. > > here a youtube video about the math: > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J4T70o8gjlk&t=456s > > > (I had implemented AHP to dynamic find the weights on service start, we > the weight could be compute once, and set statically) Yes, I mention this in the cover letter. We can still implement it later if we want to. It's true that with AHP you only have to choose pairwise weights, but in a way it doesn't make the task fundamentally easier, because you have to guess n(n-1)/2 arbitrary values rather than n arbitrary values ;)