change benchmark configration file to add QPS60 tests

test/e2e_node/density_test.go

@@ -171,33 +171,36 @@ var _ = framework.KubeDescribe("Density [Serial] [Slow]", func() {
 		}
 	})
 
-	Context("create a batch of pods with 60 QPS", func() {
+	Context("create a batch of pods with higher API QPS", func() {
 		dTests := []densityTest{
 			{
-				podsNr:   105,
-				interval: 0 * time.Millisecond,
+				podsNr:      105,
+				interval:    0 * time.Millisecond,
+				APIQPSLimit: 60,
 			},
 			{
-				podsNr:   105,
-				interval: 100 * time.Millisecond,
+				podsNr:      105,
+				interval:    100 * time.Millisecond,
+				APIQPSLimit: 60,
 			},
 			{
-				podsNr:   105,
-				interval: 300 * time.Millisecond,
+				podsNr:      105,
+				interval:    300 * time.Millisecond,
+				APIQPSLimit: 60,
 			},
 		}
 
 		for _, testArg := range dTests {
 			itArg := testArg
-			It(fmt.Sprintf("latency/resource should be within limit when create %d pods with %v interval [Benchmark]",
-				itArg.podsNr, itArg.interval), func() {
+			It(fmt.Sprintf("latency/resource should be within limit when create %d pods with %v interval (QPS %d) [Benchmark]",
+				itArg.podsNr, itArg.interval, itArg.APIQPSLimit), func() {
 				itArg.createMethod = "batch"
 				testName := itArg.getTestName()
 				// The latency caused by API QPS limit takes a large portion (up to ~33%) of e2e latency.
 				// It makes the pod startup latency of Kubelet (creation throughput as well) under-estimated.
 				// Here we set API QPS limit from default 5 to 60 in order to test real Kubelet performance.
 				// Note that it will cause higher resource usage.
-				setKubeletAPIQPSLimit(f, 60)
+				setKubeletAPIQPSLimit(f, int32(itArg.APIQPSLimit))
 				batchLag, e2eLags := runDensityBatchTest(f, rc, itArg, true)
 
 				By("Verifying latency")
@@ -290,6 +293,8 @@ type densityTest struct {
 	interval time.Duration
 	// create pods in 'batch' or 'sequence'
 	createMethod string
+	// API QPS limit
+	APIQPSLimit int
 	// performance limits
 	cpuLimits            framework.ContainersCPUSummary
 	memLimits            framework.ResourceUsagePerContainer
@@ -298,7 +303,14 @@ type densityTest struct {
 }
 
 func (dt *densityTest) getTestName() string {
-	return fmt.Sprintf("density_create_%s_%d_%d_%d", dt.createMethod, dt.podsNr, dt.bgPodsNr, dt.interval.Nanoseconds()/1000000)
+	// The current default API QPS limit is 5
+	// TODO(coufon): is there any way to not hard code this?
+	APIQPSLimit := 5
+	if dt.APIQPSLimit > 0 {
+		APIQPSLimit = dt.APIQPSLimit
+	}
+	return fmt.Sprintf("density_create_%s_%d_%d_%d_%d", dt.createMethod, dt.podsNr, dt.bgPodsNr,
+		dt.interval.Nanoseconds()/1000000, APIQPSLimit)
 }
 
 // runDensityBatchTest runs the density batch pod creation test
@@ -569,6 +581,8 @@ func setKubeletAPIQPSLimit(f *framework.Framework, newAPIQPS int32) {
 
 	// Set new API QPS limit
 	kubeCfg.KubeAPIQPS = newAPIQPS
+	// TODO(coufon): createConfigMap should firstly check whether configmap already exists, if so, use updateConfigMap.
+	// Calling createConfigMap twice will result in error. It is fine for benchmark test because we only run one test on a new node.
 	_, err = createConfigMap(f, kubeCfg)
 	framework.ExpectNoError(err)
 
@@ -580,4 +594,9 @@ func setKubeletAPIQPSLimit(f *framework.Framework, newAPIQPS int32) {
 	kubeCfg, err = decodeConfigz(resp)
 	framework.ExpectNoError(err)
 	framework.Logf("New QPS limit is: %d\n", kubeCfg.KubeAPIQPS)
+
+	// TODO(coufon): check test result to see if we need to retry here
+	if kubeCfg.KubeAPIQPS != newAPIQPS {
+		framework.Failf("Fail to set new kubelet API QPS limit.")
+	}
 }

test/e2e_node/jenkins/benchmark/benchmark-config.yaml

@@ -5,46 +5,34 @@ images:
     project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
     machine: n1-standard-1
     tests:
-      - '.*create 35 pods with 0s? interval \[Benchmark\]'    
+      - 'create 35 pods with 0s? interval \[Benchmark\]'    
   containervm-density2:
     image: e2e-node-containervm-v20160321-image
     project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
     machine: n1-standard-1
     tests:
-      - '.*create 105 pods with 0s? interval \[Benchmark\]'
+      - 'create 105 pods with 0s? interval \[Benchmark\]'
+  containervm-density2-qps60:
+    image: e2e-node-containervm-v20160321-image
+    project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
+    machine: n1-standard-1
+    tests:
+      - 'create 105 pods with 0s? interval \(QPS 60\) \[Benchmark\]'
   containervm-density3:
     image: e2e-node-containervm-v20160321-image
     project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
     machine: n1-standard-2
     tests:
-      - '.*create 105 pods with 0s? interval \[Benchmark\]'
+      - 'create 105 pods with 0s? interval \[Benchmark\]'
   containervm-density4:
     image: e2e-node-containervm-v20160321-image
     project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
     machine: n1-standard-1
     tests:
-      - '.*create 35 pods with 100ms interval \[Benchmark\]'    
-  containervm-density5:
+      - 'create 105 pods with 100ms interval \[Benchmark\]'
+  containervm-resource1:
     image: e2e-node-containervm-v20160321-image
     project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
     machine: n1-standard-1
     tests:
-      - '.*create 105 pods with 100ms interval \[Benchmark\]'
-  containervm-density6:
-    image: e2e-node-containervm-v20160321-image
-    project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
-    machine: n1-standard-2
-    tests:
-      - '.*create 105 pods with 100ms interval \[Benchmark\]'
-  containervm-density7:
-    image: e2e-node-containervm-v20160321-image
-    project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
-    machine: n1-standard-1
-    tests:
-      - '.*create 105 pods with 300ms interval \[Benchmark\]'
-  containervm-density8:
-    image: e2e-node-containervm-v20160321-image
-    project: kubernetes-node-e2e-images
-    machine: n1-standard-2
-    tests:
-      - '.*create 105 pods with 300ms interval \[Benchmark\]'
+      - 'resource tracking for 105 pods per node \[Benchmark\]'