Files
aituner/runs/frontier-fidelity-envelope-v1/fixed-pd-pressure-matching-card.md

90 lines
4.6 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

# EXP-SIMFID-Q30-FIXED-PD-PRESSURE: calibrate a nontrivial fixed-shape workload
> Status: complete (2026-07-19). This is a real-only workload calibration; its
> measurements are not part of a Frontier-versus-vLLM winner comparison.
## Question
The former Fixed-PD workload (`2048 -> 128`, 0.215 request/s/GPU) was nearly
single-request at TP4: its real mean E2E was 604 ms at a TP4 cluster rate of
0.86 request/s, or about 0.52 in-flight requests by Little's law. It therefore
does not test the decode batching regime of Trace-PD.
Can a no-prefix, uniform `4096 -> 256` workload be assigned a fixed offered
rate that reaches the healthy Trace-PD operating point without using a
simulator result for calibration?
## Controlled calibration
The reference is the real Trace-PD `TP4/MNS64` cell, chosen before this probe
because it is the real TTFT/E2E winner on that surface:
| Reference metric | Target |
|---|---:|
| mean TTFT | 245.95 ms |
| mean TPOT | 13.18 ms |
| mean E2E | 44.99 s |
| offered rate | 0.215 request/s/GPU; 0.86 request/s at TP4 |
| in-flight proxy | 38.69 requests |
The probe fixes Qwen3-30B-A3B BF16, community vLLM 0.20.0, H20, TP4, MNS64,
MBT=8192, chunked prefill, and prefix caching off. An incomplete one-trial
range-finding pilot showed global 4 rps stable and global 8 rps already badly
overloaded; it is not used in the decision. The formal probe therefore compares
per-GPU rates `{1, 1.125, 1.25, 1.5}` (global TP4 rates `{4, 4.5, 5, 6}`
request/s). Every rate has 257 exact `4096 -> 256` requests in each of three
fresh-server trials; rate orders are rotated across trials. The launcher
requires a validated vLLM 0.20 FlashInfer kernel cache; this avoids including
one-off custom-kernel JIT in server startup and does not alter request latency
measurement.
## Decision rule
Pool the three trials for each rate. Among rates with every request completed,
choose the rate minimizing the Euclidean distance of the two *relative* errors
for mean TTFT and mean TPOT from the above targets. Report p90 TTFT/TPOT/E2E,
trial variation, and `global_rate * mean_E2E` as an in-flight proxy, but do not
turn any of them into an SLO. The selected rate becomes a frozen workload
contract. The subsequent 12-cell real/simulator surface must be fresh and is
not allowed to reuse this calibration data.
## Interpretation boundary
This selects a workload regime, not a simulator parameter and not a serving
capacity point. It may make Fixed-PD more comparable to Trace-PD in batching
pressure, but it deliberately continues to exclude trace-shaped arrivals and
prefix reuse; those are separately evaluated workload dimensions.
## Result
All 12 planned cells completed (`257` requests × `3` fresh-server trials per
rate, zero client failures). The raw artifact is
`dash0:/home/admin/cpfs/wjh/aituner/qwen30-fixed-pd-pressure-20260719-r5`;
it records the vLLM version, model/config checksums, H20 inventory, FlashInfer
workspace, and an artifact checksum manifest. Pooled results are:
| Global / per-GPU rps | TTFT mean / p90 (ms) | TPOT mean / p90 (ms) | E2E mean / p90 (ms) | In-flight proxy |
|---|---:|---:|---:|---:|
| 4 / 1 | 121.53 / 125.12 | 10.75 / 11.83 | 2862.42 / 3138.92 | 11.45 |
| 4.5 / 1.125 | 122.76 / 126.29 | 11.76 / 12.55 | 3122.32 / 3322.26 | 14.05 |
| 5 / 1.25 | 125.09 / 129.66 | 15.16 / 16.58 | 3989.73 / 4354.22 | 19.95 |
| 6 / 1.5 | 129.27 / 134.69 | 21.33 / 23.03 | 5569.14 / 6005.12 | 33.41 |
The predeclared two-metric rule picks `4.5` global rps (`1.125` rps/GPU), but
that is only the *least mismatched* tested point: TTFT is still 50.1% below
the Trace-PD target (122.76 vs 245.95 ms), while TPOT is 10.7% below it (11.76
vs 13.18 ms). Raising load to 5 global rps moves TPOT past target (+15.0%)
while TTFT barely changes (125.09 ms); at 6 global rps TPOT is +61.9% while
TTFT remains 47.4% below target. Trial-level mean standard deviations are at
most 0.78 ms for TTFT and 0.34 ms for TPOT, so this is not trial-order noise.
**Conclusion:** `4096 -> 256` with uniform no-prefix arrivals cannot be called
a pressure-matched Fixed-PD control simply by setting RPS. It has much shorter
request residence time (3.12 s versus 44.99 s) and lower concurrency (14.05
versus 38.69 by the same Little-law proxy) at its closest point. For the
paper's fixed-versus-trace comparison, retain this case only as a deliberately
different fixed-shape workload; do not interpret any simulator gap as being
caused solely by trace fidelity. A future pressure-matched fixed control must
also increase output length (or otherwise preserve residence time), then repeat
this real-only calibration before reopening the Frontier-versus-vLLM surface.