refactor: remove LLM from online decisions
This commit is contained in:
@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ stratified sample, not the raw platform-wide frequency.
|
||||
| Code | Count | Sample share | Primary handling |
|
||||
| --- | ---: | ---: | --- |
|
||||
| `PREFLIGHT_OOM` | 299 | 25.1% | Deterministic model-size/GPU-memory gate |
|
||||
| `MODEL_NOT_SUPPORTED` | 244 | 20.5% | Architecture history, then LLM for the long tail |
|
||||
| missing structured report | 185 | 15.6% | Root-exception rules; LLM only when still ambiguous |
|
||||
| `MODEL_NOT_SUPPORTED` | 244 | 20.5% | Architecture history and deterministic compatibility feedback |
|
||||
| missing structured report | 185 | 15.6% | Root-exception rules; retain unknown roots for offline analysis |
|
||||
| `MODEL_LOAD_FAILED` | 132 | 11.1% | Repository checks, architecture/quantization review |
|
||||
| `EXECUTE_EMPTY_RESULT` | 126 | 10.6% | Separate platform faults from model faults first |
|
||||
| `MODEL_FILE_NOT_FOUND` | 102 | 8.6% | Require framework-specific root files |
|
||||
@@ -26,7 +26,7 @@ stratified sample, not the raw platform-wide frequency.
|
||||
| `CONTEXT_LENGTH_ERROR` | 20 | 1.7% | Clamp template context to the model limit |
|
||||
| `MISSING_OPERATOR` | 14 | 1.2% | Prefer another proven GPU/framework; semantic review |
|
||||
| `DEVICE_OOM` | 8 | 0.7% | Model/GPU memory-risk feedback |
|
||||
| other | 9 | 0.8% | Taxonomy or LLM fallback |
|
||||
| other | 9 | 0.8% | Taxonomy or explicit ambiguous classification |
|
||||
|
||||
## Important root causes
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -61,18 +61,15 @@ stratified sample, not the raw platform-wide frequency.
|
||||
|
||||
1. Deterministic checks always run first and cannot be overridden.
|
||||
2. Publicly proven GPU/framework eligibility remains mandatory.
|
||||
3. Ambiguous custom architecture/remote-code cases may be sent to a configured
|
||||
Qwen model. Ordinary quantization metadata alone does not justify an LLM call.
|
||||
4. Only a high-confidence LLM denial blocks a candidate. `allow` cannot enable
|
||||
a new framework, bypass OOM/file checks, or create exploration traffic.
|
||||
5. LLM results are cached by model/profile/GPU/framework. A persisted rolling
|
||||
hourly budget and single-request semaphore prevent repeated cycles from
|
||||
spending unbounded inference time.
|
||||
6. Outcome sync automatically inspects at most 40 locally submitted failure logs
|
||||
3. The online worker never calls an LLM. Ambiguous architecture, remote-code,
|
||||
and runtime cases remain explicitly unresolved instead of receiving a guess.
|
||||
4. Previously unseen errors may be grouped offline with experimental tooling,
|
||||
but only a human-reviewed deterministic rule can affect later submissions.
|
||||
5. Outcome sync automatically inspects at most 40 locally submitted failure logs
|
||||
at a time with four download workers and no more than three attempts per log.
|
||||
Confident semantic classifications feed the model/profile statistics; platform
|
||||
failures are excluded from compatibility rates.
|
||||
7. Repeated infrastructure failures still affect speed: three consecutive
|
||||
Rule-classified model/profile failures feed the statistics; platform failures
|
||||
are excluded from compatibility rates.
|
||||
6. Repeated infrastructure failures still affect speed: three consecutive
|
||||
platform failures on a GPU/framework open a 30-minute circuit, while five
|
||||
attributable profile failures retain the 12-hour compatibility circuit.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user