points by zamalek 11 hours ago | 0 comments
> O(millions)
Big-O doesn't include constant factors for a reason (never mind just being a constant entirely), but maybe I am misunderstanding what you are trying to say?
[–] arjie 11 hours ago
[–] alienbaby 8 hours ago
why not just say 'millions'
"Our next iteration of this scheduler aims to scale to millions of GPUs"
[–] arjie 7 hours ago
I treat it as more akin to the (slightly more-awkward) "single-digit millions" whereas "millions" could go over. It's just a SV-ism. I usually find it pretty easy to disambiguate and I confuse it as little as I do the same / in dy/dx vs. 1/2. Notational overload is pretty normal in human communication, I think.
[–] jhgg 11 hours ago
"Order of millions of GPUs being scheduled on" - which is to say when a workload is submitted to the scheduler, it makes a scheduling decision and the individual compute nodes are being programmed within milliseconds.
This means that if say a job requesting GPUs is submitted with a given topology constraint, we would already computed the physical nodes that satisfy the topology requirement, and begun preemption / begun spinning up processes on the target machines within a few milliseconds of the job being submitted. If there were no preemptions required (which means we need to first wait for graceful termination), the job is fully scheduled in the blink of an eye, whether it's on tens or hundreds of thousands of GPUs.
[–] deadnomore 11 hours ago
You are abusing big O which is worst case time complexity scaling. If I simplify your notation, then you just wrote O(1)
[–] jhgg 11 hours ago
Should have said "order of"
[–] nextaccountic 8 hours ago
It means ~millions
I like to call it Big-O Magnitude Notation.