I think the smooth weighted polling algorithm is an enhancement to the polling algorithm, and they belong to the containment relationship. Perhaps we should listen to the opinions of other partners in the community?
我认为平滑加权轮询算法是对轮询算法的增强，它们属于包含关系。一开始最早的版本我写的是加权轮询，后面又改成了平滑加权轮询。他们意义上的确有差异，但同样属于包含关系，类似的功能增强都如此，我们不应该在功能增强的时候还应该保留老的文件。 也许我们应该听取社区中其他伙伴的意见。 Yichao Yang <[email protected]>于2020年7月19日 周日下午6:24写道： > Hi, > > > I got your point. And from the point of the code logic and the functions > that can be used after code implementation, I agree that the weighted > polling algorithm is indeed applicable to scenarios without setting weights. > > > But in terms of module division and architecture design, the weight will > be coupled into the existing simple round robin algorithm. In fact, the > weighted round robin algorithm is also a separate algorithm, which is > different from the simple round robin algorithm in terms of > design[1]. > > > What I want to express in my last email[2] is that from the perspective of > module division and enhancement of module clarity, Is it better > to introduce weighted rotation training and other algorithms into new > algorithms instead of adding weight logic to the previous algorithms? > > > > -------------- > > > 我明白你的观点，从代码逻辑以及实现后能展现出来的功能角度上，我是同意加权轮询算法确实是适用于没有设置权重的场景的。 > > > > 但是，在模块划分上和架构设计上，其实是把权重这部分给耦合进了现有的简单轮训算法中了。加权轮训算法其实也是一种单独的算法，和简单轮训算法在设计角度和功能上是不一样的[1]。 > > > > 我在上一份邮件中表达的意思是说，从模块划分，增强模块清晰度的角度，我们把加权轮训等算法以新的算法引入，而不去在以前的算法上加入权重的逻辑是不是会更好点呢？ > > > [1] https://blog.csdn.net/bohu83/article/details/79669051 > [2] > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r05005385cd0a52be8e601fd1e76a8dacbf3a24c679a3a435eb1d9c8a%40%3Cdev.dolphinscheduler.apache.org%3E > > > If you have any question or suggetion, welcome to put forward~ > > > Best, > Yichao Yang > > > > > ------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------ > 发件人: > "dev" > < > [email protected]>; > 发送时间: 2020年7月19日(星期天) 下午5:31 > 收件人: "dev"<[email protected]>; > > 主题: Re: Re： [DISCUSS]Load balancing weight > > > > Hi, I think you have misunderstood. In fact, the weighted smooth polling > algorithm is also suitable for scenarios where no weight is set. > > Best wishes！ > CalvinKirs > > On 2020/07/19 03:13:10, "Yichao Yang" <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > > I got your point. > > > > > > I agree with your about the all algorithms you mentioned should be > measured by weight. But I think we should keep the original algorithm which > is not based on weight selection. and the algorithm based on weight should > appear in a new algorithm. > > > > > > In my opinion. Actually in our production environment, there are few > differences in the performance of the machines as you mentioned. In most > cases, the machine performance and configuration are consistent in our > production environment. > > > > > > So there are two scenarios for this weight based algorithm. The first > one is the one you mentioned. The second may occur when a user wants to use > half of the performance of machine A, rather than full use of machine A. > > > > > > So is it better to keep the original algorithm and also provide those > new selection algorithms based on weight? > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > Yichao Yang > > > > > > > > > > ------------------ 原始邮件 ------------------ > > > 发件人: > "dev" > <[email protected]>; > > 发送时间: 2020年7月18日(星期六) 晚上10:12 > > 收件人: "dev"<[email protected]>; > > > > 主题: Re: [DISCUSS]Load balancing weight > > > > > > > > Let me give an example. It might be better. Suppose my computer A has > twice > > the processing power of computer B. Then I have three tasks. > According to > > the polling algorithm, A will handle two and B will handle one. Isn't > our > > purpose of load balancing to make each machine work evenly? > > > > Best wishes！ > > CalvinKirs> > > > > On 2020/07/18 13:56:38, lidong dai <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I have a little confused about adding a weight to what you said, > like> > > > assign tasks to machines in turn, there is normally no > weights> > > > > > > > > > > > > Best Regards> > > > ---------------> > > > DolphinScheduler(Incubator) PPMC> > > > Lidong Dai 代立冬> > > > [email protected]> > > > ---------------> > > > > > > > > > CalvinKirs <[email protected]> 于2020年7月18日周六 下午5:55写道：> > > > > > > > Hi, everyone. I’m currently designing weight-based load > balancing. My> > > > > point of view is that all load balancing needs to be done > based on > > weights,> > > > > because load actually means that machines with good > performance are> > > > > expected to handle more tasks. Therefore, weights should be > Reflected > > in> > > > > each load balancing algorithm, it should be a default > attribute in > > load> > > > > balancing.> > > > >> > > > > Hope to get your suggestions.> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > Best wishes！> > > > > CalvinKirs> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
