volcano icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
volcano copied to clipboard

Request to support more NUMA alignment features

Open shinytang6 opened this issue 4 years ago • 6 comments

What would you like to be added:

Currently we supported cpu numa alignment in volcano, k8s has already supported memory alignment and PCI devices alignment in version 1.22, it will be great to complement these features in volcano )

ref: https://kubernetes.io/blog/2021/08/11/kubernetes-1-22-feature-memory-manager-moves-to-beta/

sub tasks

  • [x] CPU NUMA alignment
  • [ ] Memory NUMA alignment

shinytang6 avatar Sep 15 '21 07:09 shinytang6

/cc @huone1 @william-wang

Thor-wl avatar Sep 15 '21 09:09 Thor-wl

Does volcano support numa-aware just for predicate and priority at present? But fail to apply the result to kubelet(final node-level numa placement), right?

justadogistaken avatar Nov 28 '21 12:11 justadogistaken

Does volcano support numa-aware just for predicate and priority at present? But fail to apply the result to kubelet(final node-level numa placement), right?

yes, it is, because the kubelet doesn't provide a interface to support to use the resource topology allocated of shceduler

huone1 avatar Nov 29 '21 01:11 huone1

Hello 👋 Looks like there was no activity on this issue for last 90 days. Do you mind updating us on the status? Is this still reproducible or needed? If yes, just comment on this PR or push a commit. Thanks! 🤗 If there will be no activity for 60 days, this issue will be closed (we can always reopen an issue if we need!).

stale[bot] avatar Feb 27 '22 01:02 stale[bot]

Hello 👋 Looks like there was no activity on this issue for last 90 days. Do you mind updating us on the status? Is this still reproducible or needed? If yes, just comment on this PR or push a commit. Thanks! 🤗 If there will be no activity for 60 days, this issue will be closed (we can always reopen an issue if we need!).

stale[bot] avatar May 31 '22 03:05 stale[bot]

Hello 👋 Looks like there was no activity on this issue for last 90 days. Do you mind updating us on the status? Is this still reproducible or needed? If yes, just comment on this PR or push a commit. Thanks! 🤗 If there will be no activity for 60 days, this issue will be closed (we can always reopen an issue if we need!).

stale[bot] avatar Sep 22 '22 04:09 stale[bot]

Closing for now as there was no activity for last 60 days after marked as stale, let us know if you need this to be reopened! 🤗

stale[bot] avatar Nov 26 '22 23:11 stale[bot]