Ctrl+K

Benchmarking Triton via HTTP or gRPC endpoint

Benchmarking Triton via HTTP or gRPC endpoint#

This is the default mode for Perf Analyzer.

Benchmarking Triton directly via C API#

Besides using HTTP or gRPC server endpoints to communicate with Triton, Perf Analyzer also allows users to benchmark Triton directly using the C API. HTTP and gRPC endpoints introduce an additional latency in the pipeline which may not be of interest to users who are using Triton via C API within their application. Specifically, this feature is useful to benchmark a bare minimum Triton without additional overheads from HTTP/gRPC communication.

Prerequisite#

Pull the Triton SDK and the Triton Server container images on target machine. Since you will need access to the tritonserver install, it might be easier if you copy the perf_analyzer binary to the Inference Server container.

Required parameters#

Use the --help option to see a complete list of supported command line arguments. By default, Perf Analyzer expects the Triton instance to already be running. You can configure C API mode using the --service-kind option. In addition, you will need to point Perf Analyzer to the Triton server library path using the --triton-server-directory option and the model repository path using the --model-repository option.

An example run would look like:

$ perf_analyzer -m my_model --service-kind=triton_c_api --triton-server-directory=/opt/tritonserver --model-repository=/my/model/repository
...
*** Measurement Settings ***
  Service Kind: Triton C-API
  Using "time_windows" mode for stabilization
  Measurement window: 5000 msec
  Using synchronous calls for inference
  Stabilizing using average latency

Request concurrency: 1
  Client:
    Request count: 353
    Throughput: 19.6095 infer/sec
    Avg latency: 50951 usec (standard deviation 2265 usec)
    p50 latency: 50833 usec
    p90 latency: 50923 usec
    p95 latency: 50940 usec
    p99 latency: 50985 usec

  Server:
    Inference count: 353
    Execution count: 353
    Successful request count: 353
    Avg request latency: 50841 usec (overhead 20 usec + queue 63 usec + compute input 35 usec + compute infer 50663 usec + compute output 59 usec)

Inferences/Second vs. Client Average Batch Latency
Concurrency: 1, throughput: 19.6095 infer/sec, latency 50951 usec

Non-supported functionalities#

There are a few functionalities that are missing from C API mode. They are:

  1. Async mode (--async)

  2. For additional known non-working cases, please refer to qa/L0_perf_analyzer_capi/test.sh

Benchmarking TensorFlow Serving#

Perf Analyzer can also be used to benchmark models deployed on TensorFlow Serving using the --service-kind=tfserving option. Only gRPC protocol is supported.

The following invocation demonstrates how to configure Perf Analyzer to issue requests to a running instance of tensorflow_model_server:

$ perf_analyzer -m resnet50 --service-kind tfserving -i grpc -b 1 -p 5000 -u localhost:8500
*** Measurement Settings ***
  Batch size: 1
  Using "time_windows" mode for stabilization
  Measurement window: 5000 msec
  Using synchronous calls for inference
  Stabilizing using average latency
Request concurrency: 1
  Client:
    Request count: 829
    Throughput: 165.8 infer/sec
    Avg latency: 6032 usec (standard deviation 569 usec)
    p50 latency: 5863 usec
    p90 latency: 6655 usec
    p95 latency: 6974 usec
    p99 latency: 8093 usec
    Avg gRPC time: 5984 usec ((un)marshal request/response 257 usec + response wait 5727 usec)
Inferences/Second vs. Client Average Batch Latency
Concurrency: 1, throughput: 165.8 infer/sec, latency 6032 usec

You might have to specify a different url (-u) to access wherever the server is running. The report of Perf Analyzer will only include statistics measured at the client-side.

NOTE: The support is still in beta. Perf Analyzer does not guarantee optimal tuning for TensorFlow Serving. However, a single benchmarking tool that can be used to stress the inference servers in an identical manner is important for performance analysis.

The following points are important for interpreting the results:

  1. Concurrent Request Execution: TensorFlow Serving (TFS), as of version 2.8.0, by default creates threads for each request that individually submits requests to TensorFlow Session. There is a resource limit on the number of concurrent threads serving requests. When benchmarking at a higher request concurrency, you can see higher throughput because of this. Unlike TFS, by default Triton is configured with only a single instance count. Hence, at a higher request concurrency, most of the requests are blocked on the instance availability. To configure Triton to behave like TFS, set the instance count to a reasonably high value and then set MAX_SESSION_SHARE_COUNT parameter in the model config.pbtxt to the same value. For some context, the TFS sets its thread constraint to four times the num of schedulable CPUs.

  2. Different library versions: The version of TensorFlow might differ between Triton and TensorFlow Serving being benchmarked. Even the versions of CUDA libraries might differ between the two solutions. The performance of models can be susceptible to the versions of these libraries. For a single request concurrency, if the compute_infer time reported by Perf Analyzer when benchmarking Triton is as large as the latency reported by Perf Analyzer when benchmarking TFS, then the performance difference is likely because of the difference in the software stack and outside the scope of Triton.

  3. CPU Optimization: TFS has separate builds for CPU and GPU targets. They have target-specific optimization. Unlike TFS, Triton has a single build which is optimized for execution on GPUs. When collecting performance on CPU models on Triton, try running Triton with the environment variable TF_ENABLE_ONEDNN_OPTS=1.

Benchmarking TorchServe#

Perf Analyzer can also be used to benchmark TorchServe using the --service-kind=torchserve option. Only HTTP protocol is supported. It also requires input to be provided via JSON file.

The following invocation demonstrates how to configure Perf Analyzer to issue requests to a running instance of torchserve assuming the location holds kitten_small.jpg:

$ perf_analyzer -m resnet50 --service-kind torchserve -i http -u localhost:8080 -b 1 -p 5000 --input-data data.json
 Successfully read data for 1 stream/streams with 1 step/steps.
*** Measurement Settings ***
  Batch size: 1
  Using "time_windows" mode for stabilization
  Measurement window: 5000 msec
  Using synchronous calls for inference
  Stabilizing using average latency
Request concurrency: 1
  Client:
    Request count: 799
    Throughput: 159.8 infer/sec
    Avg latency: 6259 usec (standard deviation 397 usec)
    p50 latency: 6305 usec
    p90 latency: 6448 usec
    p95 latency: 6494 usec
    p99 latency: 7158 usec
    Avg HTTP time: 6272 usec (send/recv 77 usec + response wait 6195 usec)
Inferences/Second vs. Client Average Batch Latency
Concurrency: 1, throughput: 159.8 infer/sec, latency 6259 usec

The content of data.json:

 {
   "data" :
    [
       {
         "TORCHSERVE_INPUT" : ["kitten_small.jpg"]
       }
     ]
 }

You might have to specify a different url (-u) to access wherever the server is running. The report of Perf Analyzer will only include statistics measured at the client-side.

NOTE: The support is still in beta. Perf Analyzer does not guarantee optimal tuning for TorchServe. However, a single benchmarking tool that can be used to stress the inference servers in an identical manner is important for performance analysis.

Advantages of using Perf Analyzer over third-party benchmark suites#

Triton Inference Server offers the entire serving solution which includes client libraries that are optimized for Triton. Using third-party benchmark suites like jmeter fails to take advantage of the optimized libraries. Some of these optimizations includes but are not limited to:

  1. Using binary tensor data extension with HTTP requests.

  2. Effective re-use of gRPC message allocation in subsequent requests.

  3. Avoiding extra memory copy via libcurl interface.

These optimizations can have a tremendous impact on overall performance. Using Perf Analyzer for benchmarking directly allows a user to access these optimizations in their study.

Not only that, Perf Analyzer is also very customizable and supports many Triton features as described in this document. This, along with a detailed report, allows a user to identify performance bottlenecks and experiment with different features before deciding upon what works best for them.

Contents