I also think as a new algorithm will be better
Best Regards --------------- DolphinScheduler(Incubator) PPMC Lidong Dai 代立冬 [email protected] --------------- 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> > > > >> > > > >> > > >
