Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix: application-system-api replicas too high due to CPU request being too low #15958

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Sep 11, 2024

Conversation

peturgq
Copy link
Member

@peturgq peturgq commented Sep 11, 2024

...

Attach a link to issue if relevant

What

Specify what you're trying to achieve

Why

Specify why you need to achieve this

Screenshots / Gifs

Attach Screenshots / Gifs to help reviewers understand the scope of the pull request

Checklist:

  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • Formatting passes locally with my changes
  • I have rebased against main before asking for a review

Summary by CodeRabbit

  • New Features

    • Increased CPU resource allocation for the application system worker across all environments (development, production, staging) to enhance performance and handle increased workloads.
  • Bug Fixes

    • No bug fixes were included in this release.
  • Documentation

    • No documentation updates were made in this release.
  • Chores

    • Updated resource allocation settings in configuration files for consistency across environments.

@peturgq peturgq requested a review from a team as a code owner September 11, 2024 14:07
@peturgq peturgq added the automerge Merge this PR as soon as all checks pass label Sep 11, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

coderabbitai bot commented Sep 11, 2024

Walkthrough

The pull request introduces modifications to the resource allocation settings for the application-system-api-worker across multiple configuration files. Specifically, the CPU request has been increased from '100m' to '150m' in the workerSetup export of the application-system-api.ts file and in the values files for development, production, and staging environments. The memory allocation remains unchanged at '384Mi'. These changes reflect an adjustment in resource management.

Changes

Files Change Summary
apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts CPU request increased from '100m' to '150m' in workerSetup.
charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml, charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml, charts/islandis/values.staging.yaml CPU request increased from '100m' to '150m' for application-system-api-worker.

Possibly related PRs


Recent review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between fd7e324 and 57b97dd.

Files selected for processing (3)
  • charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml (1 hunks)
  • charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml (1 hunks)
  • charts/islandis/values.staging.yaml (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (3)
  • charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml
  • charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml
  • charts/islandis/values.staging.yaml

Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media?

Share
Tips

Chat

There are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:

  • Review comments: Directly reply to a review comment made by CodeRabbit. Example:
    • I pushed a fix in commit <commit_id>.
    • Generate unit testing code for this file.
    • Open a follow-up GitHub issue for this discussion.
  • Files and specific lines of code (under the "Files changed" tab): Tag @coderabbitai in a new review comment at the desired location with your query. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate unit testing code for this file.
    • @coderabbitai modularize this function.
  • PR comments: Tag @coderabbitai in a new PR comment to ask questions about the PR branch. For the best results, please provide a very specific query, as very limited context is provided in this mode. Examples:
    • @coderabbitai generate interesting stats about this repository and render them as a table.
    • @coderabbitai show all the console.log statements in this repository.
    • @coderabbitai read src/utils.ts and generate unit testing code.
    • @coderabbitai read the files in the src/scheduler package and generate a class diagram using mermaid and a README in the markdown format.
    • @coderabbitai help me debug CodeRabbit configuration file.

Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments.

CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)

  • @coderabbitai pause to pause the reviews on a PR.
  • @coderabbitai resume to resume the paused reviews.
  • @coderabbitai review to trigger an incremental review. This is useful when automatic reviews are disabled for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai full review to do a full review from scratch and review all the files again.
  • @coderabbitai summary to regenerate the summary of the PR.
  • @coderabbitai resolve resolve all the CodeRabbit review comments.
  • @coderabbitai configuration to show the current CodeRabbit configuration for the repository.
  • @coderabbitai help to get help.

Other keywords and placeholders

  • Add @coderabbitai ignore anywhere in the PR description to prevent this PR from being reviewed.
  • Add @coderabbitai summary to generate the high-level summary at a specific location in the PR description.
  • Add @coderabbitai anywhere in the PR title to generate the title automatically.

Documentation and Community

  • Visit our Documentation for detailed information on how to use CodeRabbit.
  • Join our Discord Community to get help, request features, and share feedback.
  • Follow us on X/Twitter for updates and announcements.

Copy link
Member

@robertaandersen robertaandersen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@coderabbitai coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actionable comments posted: 0

Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts (1)

116-116: Approve the CPU request increase for the worker setup.

The change looks good! Increasing the CPU request from '100m' to '150m' could potentially enhance the worker's performance or help it handle increased load.

Are there any specific reasons, such as performance metrics or anticipated load, that led to this resource adjustment? Providing this context could help reviewers better understand the motivation behind the change.

Review details

Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL

Commits

Files that changed from the base of the PR and between 82360b0 and fd7e324.

Files selected for processing (4)
  • apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts (1 hunks)
  • charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml (1 hunks)
  • charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml (1 hunks)
  • charts/islandis/values.staging.yaml (1 hunks)
Additional context used
Path-based instructions (1)
apps/application-system/api/infra/application-system-api.ts (1)

Pattern apps/**/*: "Confirm that the code adheres to the following:

  • NextJS best practices, including file structure, API routes, and static generation methods.
  • Efficient state management and server-side rendering techniques.
  • Optimal use of TypeScript for component and utility type safety."
Additional comments not posted (3)
charts/islandis/values.staging.yaml (1)

883-883: LGTM, but verify the need for increased CPU request.

The change to increase the CPU request from 100m to 150m for the application-system-api-worker is approved.

However, it's recommended to verify if this increase is actually needed by analyzing the worker's CPU utilization metrics. Overallocating CPU resources unnecessarily can lead to inefficient resource utilization across the cluster. Adjust the request based on the actual requirements.

charts/islandis/values.prod.yaml (1)

875-875: Approve the CPU request increase, but verify the utilization and scaling.

The CPU request for application-system-api-worker has been increased from 100m to 150m, which can help improve performance by allocating more CPU resources to the worker.

However, it's important to verify that this change aligns with the current CPU utilization and auto-scaling configuration to ensure it's appropriate and won't lead to resource wastage or insufficient resources during peak loads.

Run the following script to verify the CPU utilization and scaling configuration:

charts/islandis/values.dev.yaml (1)

885-886: Increase in CPU request looks good, but please verify if it's needed.

The CPU request for the application-system-api-worker is being increased from 100m to 150m.

This change can potentially improve the worker's performance by allocating more CPU resources to it. However, it's important to verify if this increase aligns with the actual CPU utilization observed for this worker.

Please confirm if increasing the CPU request to 150m is justified based on the worker's CPU utilization metrics. If the worker is not CPU bound and the utilization is well below 100m, then increasing the request may not provide benefits and will result in overallocation of cluster resources.

To verify, please run the following commands:

Review the CPU utilization percentage and compare it against the current 100m request. If the utilization is constantly above 80%, then increasing to 150m is justified. However, if it's well below 80%, please reconsider this change to avoid overallocation.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 11, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 36.84%. Comparing base (bcf0cde) to head (57b97dd).
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #15958      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   36.84%   36.84%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files        6709     6709              
  Lines      137552   137554       +2     
  Branches    39101    39103       +2     
==========================================
  Hits        50676    50676              
- Misses      86876    86878       +2     
Flag Coverage Δ
api 3.39% <ø> (ø)
application-system-api 41.69% <ø> (-0.01%) ⬇️
application-template-api-modules 23.46% <ø> (-0.04%) ⬇️
application-ui-shell 21.08% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

see 1 file with indirect coverage changes


Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update bcf0cde...57b97dd. Read the comment docs.

@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot merged commit b3af8c0 into main Sep 11, 2024
41 checks passed
@kodiakhq kodiakhq bot deleted the scaling/application-system-api branch September 11, 2024 14:24
jonnigs pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 12, 2024
…g too low (#15958)

* fix: application-system-api replicas too high due to CPU request being too low

* chore: charts update dirty files

---------

Co-authored-by: andes-it <builders@andes.is>
Co-authored-by: kodiakhq[bot] <49736102+kodiakhq[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
automerge Merge this PR as soon as all checks pass
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants