Add actor affinity scheduling strategy by actor handle #24
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
larrylian
force-pushed
the
actor_affinity_only_actor_handle
branch
from
b7e958a to
21334a8
Compare
larrylian
requested review from
Chong-Li,
ericl,
fishbone,
jjyao,
jovany-wang,
rkooo567,
scv119,
stephanie-wang and
wumuzi520
Signed-off-by: 稚鱼 <[email protected]>
larrylian
force-pushed
the
actor_affinity_only_actor_handle
branch
from
21334a8 to
3292a44
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The value of introducing the Labels mechanism for scheduling was discussed in this REP（[Add labels mechanism] #13 ) before.
The ActorAffinity API discussed before has changed too much, so now a separate REP is separated to discuss the first version of ActorAffinity. Now this version of the ActorAffinity API only uses actor_handle.
In fact, everyone should know about ActorAffinity before. I think we can reach an agreement on the following points in this REP.