forked from bazelbuild/bazel
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Use failure_rate instead of failure count for circuit breaker
Continuation of bazelbuild#18359 I ran multiple experiment and tried to find optimal failure threshold and failure window interval with different remote_timeout, for healthy remote cache, semi-healthy (overloaded) remote cache and unhealthy remote cache. As I described [here](bazelbuild#18359 (comment)) even with healthy remote cache there was 5-10% circuit trip and we were not getting the best result. Issue related to the failure count: 1. When the remote cache is healthy, builds are fast, and Bazel makes a high number of calls to the buildfarm. As a result, even with a moderate failure rate, the failure count may exceed the threshold. 2. Additionally, write calls, which have a higher probability of failure compared to other calls, are batched immediately after the completion of an action's build. This further increases the chances of breaching the failure threshold within the defined window interval. 3. On the other hand, when the remote cache is unhealthy or semi-healthy, builds are significantly slowed down, and Bazel makes fewer calls to the remote cache. Finding a configuration that works well for both healthy and unhealthy remote caches was not feasible. Therefore, changed the approach to use the failure rate, and easily found a configuration that worked effectively in both scenarios. Closes bazelbuild#18539. PiperOrigin-RevId: 538588379 Change-Id: I64a49eeeb32846d41d54ca3b637ded3085588528
- Loading branch information
Showing
7 changed files
with
109 additions
and
96 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.