Expand infrastructure sizing guidance for large self-managed deployments
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Go
- Stars
- 218
- Forks
- 72
- Avg merge
- 1d 12h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 427
Description
Report needed documentation
Current infrastructure sizing guidance provides useful starting tiers but needs a clearer method for sizing self-managed NVCF at scale.
Describe the documentation you'd like
Explain how control-plane CPU, memory, node count, and persistent storage should change with function count, request concurrency, message volume, retention, and availability requirements. Keep GPU worker sizing separate and show operators how to validate estimates with the public load-test guidance.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the current infrastructure sizing guidance and the public load-test guidance. Trace how control-plane resources, node count, storage, workload factors, and availability requirements are currently described. Done means the documentation provides a clearer sizing method for large self-managed deployments and explains how operators can validate estimates with load tests.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- kubernetes
- Domain
- cloud, documentation, infrastructure
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 3/5
- Estimated time
- 1-2 days
- Activity status
- Quiet
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 68/100