[contestms] Re: Fwd: outsourcing cmsWorkerService
- From: Motiejus Jakštys <desired.mta@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: contestms@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 29 Oct 2014 09:21:15 +0100
Hi Stefano,
thanks for a swift and very detailed reply! Situation for our setup is
great, just a few last details to figure out.
On Wed, Oct 29, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Stefano Maggiolo <s.maggiolo@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Thank you Motiejus, also for moving the conversation :)
>
> On Tue Oct 28 2014 at 10:34:47 PM Motiejus Jakštys <desired.mta@xxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>>
> The Worker is in contact with two other components: ES (that passes the job
> metadata and gets back the metadata of the completed job), and the DB
> (specifically, only the file storage part).
Thanks, I wasn't aware that worker connects to DB.
> From a size perspective, the communication with ES is very light. It is also
> arguable that a contestant having full access to that communication wouldn't
> gain anything practical.
Worker communication with DB is equally important as with ES, since in
our case DB would stay on-site (on slow hardware and potentially bad
uplink), whereas Workers would be in the datacenter.
>> * Do the test artifacts stay on the Worker for the evaluation, or are
>> they sent back?
>
> What do you mean by test artifacts? If I understand the question, the
> evaluation is going to be done by probably a different Worker. As the file
> storage has a cache on the Worker, though, if the evaluation is sent to the
> same Worker, it is going to retrieve the executable from the cache instead
> than from the DB.
Sorry, old-style contests taking over my mind. Please disregard this
question, situation is good.
> Good question :)
> Testcases are transferred only when the worker starts, and the cache is
> persistent, so if the worker restart in general there is no need to re-fill
> the cache. It is going to happen only if you change testcases.
> In my experience usually that is by far the heaviest operation. During the
> contest, the heaviest objects are going to be (statically linked)
> executables, as a rule of thumb about 2MB per executable.
That is all great, thank you.
> Hope this helps. If you are going to use this solution, we'd like to have a
> report :)
If we'll use this setup, I promise you the report.
--
Motiejus Jakštys
Other related posts:
