openclaw / openclaw/openclaw-windows-node
local-ai: Clarify llama-server parallelism and context sizing for concurrent sub-agent requests
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- C#
- Stars
- 2.1k
- Forks
- 295
- Avg merge
- 1d 6h
- Merged PRs (30d)
- 99
Description
Question
OpenClaw's current managed llama-server recipe sets parallelRequests: 1, which is emitted as parallel = 1 in the generated server preset:
I would like to confirm how this behaves in an OpenClaw workflow with multiple concurrent sub-agents.
Suppose one sub-agent is generating a long response and is in steady-state autoregressive decode, normally producing one token per forward pass or a few committed tokens when speculative MTP succeeds. Other sub-agents then submit inference requests concurrently.
-
With
parallel = 1(--parallel 1/-np 1), doesllama-serverpermit only one active inference sequence, leaving every other request queued until that request completes or releases the slot? -
If so, are the queued requests unable to participate in continuous batching, regardless of how large
ctx-sizeis? -
If
parallelis increased, how shouldctx-sizebe interpreted and budgeted? Is it a total server context budget shared or partitioned across the slots, or can each active request use the configured context size? -
Would increasing parallelism therefore require reducing the maximum context per sub-agent to keep KV-cache and overall GPU-memory usage feasible?
-
For OpenClaw's multi-agent workload, should the qualified recipe select parallelism and per-request context together for each model/GPU tier, or is intentionally serializing requests the preferred behavior?
Clarifying this would help determine whether the current value is an intentional memory/latency tradeoff or a limitation for concurrent local-agent workflows.
CC: @jacobtomlinson, Ryan Hill
Contributor guide
No contributing guide indexed for this repository
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 LocalModelCatalog.cs lines 225-237 and LlamaServerRouterConfiguration.cs lines 112-126 to trace how parallelRequests becomes the generated parallel setting. Verify the llama-server behavior for concurrent requests, context sizing, and memory tradeoffs, then document whether OpenClaw should pair parallelism with per-request context or retain serialization.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- csharp
- Domain
- ai
- Issue type
- Documentation
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Active
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 52/100