Changes between Version 13 and Version 14 of assign+


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Aug 7, 2013 1:04:03 PM (7 years ago)
Author:
sunshine
Comment:

--

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified
  • assign+

    v13 v14  
    6161|| Both ''assign'' and ''assign+'' succeeded || 98,639 || 90% || n/a ||
    6262|| ''assign'' succeeded, ''assign+'' failed || 98 || 0.1% || In 93 of these cases ''assign'' doesn't detect a disconnected switch topology nor oversubscribed interswitch bandwidth, but it should. In 2 cases we overestimate what we need in one vclass. I can fix this issue but it will have to wait. In 3 cases the ''ptopfile'' has an error - two interfaces on a physical node are called the same. ''assign'' doesn't pick up on this but ''assign+'' does, which should be correct behavior. So effectively in only 2 out of 109,326 ''assign'' is better than ''assign+''. ||
    63 ||  Both ''assign'' and ''assign+'' failed || 6,341 || 5.8% || ||
    64 || ''assign'' failed, ''assign+'' succeeded, ''assign'' succeeded with fixed nodes from ''assign+'' || 666 || 0.6% || ||
     63||  Both ''assign'' and ''assign+'' failed || 6,341 || 5.8% || n/a ||
     64|| ''assign'' failed, ''assign+'' succeeded, ''assign'' succeeded with fixed nodes from ''assign+'' || 666 || 0.6% || There is a good solution but ''assign'' cannot find it in a given number of trials.||
    6565|| ''assign'' failed, ''assign+'' succeeded, ''assign'' failed with fixed nodes from ''assign+'' || 3,580 || 3.2% || This happens because ''assign'' cannot properly deal with fixed interfaces. I checked quite a few of these solutions manually and they are possible solutions. ||
     66
     67== Expfailedtests ==
     68
     69There were total of 9,861 tests. Historically, all these allocations failed.
     70
     71||Category|| Count|| Percentage || Reason ||
     72|| Both ''assign'' and ''assign+'' succeeded || 294 || 3% || ''assign'' sometimes fails due to "luck". There is a good solution but it runs out of trials to find it. ||
     73|| ''assign'' succeeded, ''assign+'' failed || 4 || 0.04% || In one case there was a disconnected switch topology. In other 3 cases ''assign'' does not properly check for OS support and ends up assigning nodes that cannot load a requested OS. Thus effectively there were 0 cases in these tests where ''assign'' was better than ''assign+'' ||
     74||  Both ''assign'' and ''assign+'' failed || 9,409 || 95% || n/a||
     75|| ''assign'' failed, ''assign+'' succeeded, ''assign'' succeeded with fixed nodes from ''assign+'' || 147 || 1.5% || There is a good solution but ''assign'' cannot find it in a given number of trials. ||
     76|| ''assign'' failed, ''assign+'' succeeded, ''assign'' failed with fixed nodes from ''assign+'' || 1 || 0.01% || This happens because ''assign'' cannot properly deal with fixed interfaces. I checked quite a few of these solutions manually and they are possible solutions. ||