add sleeping and spinning benchmark

[HermioneKT]

This PR add 2 new benchmarks sleeping (to simulate I/O bounded task) and spinning (to simulate CPU bounded task) such that i can investigate how dynamically configure cpu frequency affects latency of such tasks

[dhschall]

Hi @HermioneKT,
first of all thank you very much for contributing new benchmarks. Overall it looks already quite good but there are a couple of things to address.

First, both functions are almost the same. How about if you combine both, make one function and make it configurable with a input argument.

function = flag.String("functionality", "sleep", "Define the functionality of the function. Possible values: [sleep, spin]")

This way less files need to be maintained. Also, one can easily add a memory-intense version that randomly reads and writes from and to a large memory region (Btw. would be nice if you can add that already ;))
You can keep two yaml files. One with - --functionality=sleep and another one with spin.

Second, I think you should make the spinning as a delay as well. I don't know how much time it takes for the 30000 loop iterations. Is it long or short? Having a parameter that lets you spin for 20 ms is more intuitive.

Then we need to integrate it into the CI. Just copy the .github/workflows/e2e-gptj.yml file and replace all gptj references with your new image. I.e.

vSwarm/.github/workflows/e2e-gptj.yml

Line 38 in c5ae2f2

gptj-python

No worries I'll help you with that :)

Small changes see my other comments.

Finally, before we merge you need to squash all commits into one commit and you also need to sign-off the commit. Refer to: https://github.com/vhive-serverless/vHive/blob/main/docs/contributing_to_vhive.md#commit-sign-off

Thanks, again and let me know if something is unclear or you need help

[dhschall]

I also added a CI workflow and tested it in #852.
Can you copy the spin-sleep.yaml in your code.
Also as you see here https://github.com/vhive-serverless/vSwarm/actions/runs/7856433672/job/21439224624#step:9:1 it fails to deploy in knative

[HermioneKT]

Hi @dhschall, I have fixed the end-to-end test, thank you! I would like to request review from you again if possible.

[dhschall]

Thank you @HermioneKT for the update. It looks all very great!
Great you made the CI work. Sometimes that is a bit annoying ;)

Can you now just add the second benchmark into the same file. Otherwise the second benchmark will never be build and tested.

[dhschall]

Thank you for adding the delay parameter. Can you make it the same indentation level as the others
You can also run the go linter.

[dhschall]

Suggestion:
This benchmark can be used to investigate the effects of cpu scaling on the latency of CPU-bound workloads.

[dhschall]

Just a question what is the nodeSelector for?

[HermioneKT]

it is to control which node the benchmark should be invoked on. This is because one of my experiments requires spinning benchmark to be invoked on a high frequency node, sleeping benchmark on a low frequency node (which is why we need them in two different knative service with different knative yaml file to specify different nodeSelector) It did not pass the CI previously, because we need to run a command to enable this feature in Knative Serving that allows us to specify a NodeSelector in the pod spec of our Knative service first before deploying the service.

[dhschall]

Suggested change

	sleeping-go
	sleeping-go,
	spinning-go

[dhschall]

Please add the spinning benchmark otherwise it will never be tested

You also need a second parameter for the docker file:
Similar to:

matrix:
        include:
          - service: sleeping-go
            file: benchmarks/sleeping/docker/Dockerfile

[dhschall]

Suggested change

target: ${{ matrix.target }}

The target is not needed since you only have one function per docker file

[dhschall]

Suggested change

	file: benchmarks/sleeping/docker/Dockerfile
	file: ${{ matrix.file }}

Since you have different docker files you have to make this as a parameter.
Similar as you did for knative

[dhschall]

Nice, thank you for your contribution.
It looks good to me.
No worries about the linters. They seem to be broken.