Great - thanks! On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 1:55 PM Markus Thoemmes <markus.thoem...@de.ibm.com> wrote:
> Good question Tyson, > > there is no way in our fast-moving environment to get these values 100% > "accurate" anyway (at least not with some sort of state sharing as we used > to have it), so the sharding loadbalancer doesn't even try. Instead, the > limits are divided among the controller evenly. On top of that, 20% slack > is added to accord for round-robin imbalances in front of the controller. > > If a user for example is allowed to invoke 1000 actions concurrently and > we have 2 controllers in the system, we're giving 20% slack (1200 > invocations) and divide that by the number of controllers (1200/2 = 600). > Each controller now allows for 600 invocations concurrently. With > round-robin in front of them that should in practice be enough to roughly > maintain the limits as today. > > Does that help? > > Cheers > Markus > >
