Files
llmgw/README.md
T
Ilker ManapandClaude Opus 5 a2b3f63a0d
CI / test (push) Successful in 1m56s
Release / build (push) Failing after 2m31s
Say what v0.6.0 is, and let the release actually publish it
The changelog had two "Unreleased" headings. The second sat below v0.5.0 and
was the detail behind it — phases 2 and 3, written while they were in progress
and never folded in when the release was cut — so it claimed as unreleased
work that had been shipped for two days. It is now a section of v0.5.0. The
status table said v0.5.0 was planned, which its own release notes disprove.

The first "Unreleased" becomes v0.6.0: eighty commits, of which phase 4 is the
headline and the rest is what a cluster needs before anyone but its operator
is let near it.

Two things would have stopped the release workflow publishing anything:

Gitea gives every job a built-in GITEA_TOKEN, but what it may do depends on
the instance's default mode, and under the restricted default it is read-only
on releases. The job now asks for `releases: write`, which is correct under
either default. An upload that is refused now fails the job — without `-f`,
curl treats a 403 body as a successful transfer, so the release would end up
with some of its files, or none, and a green tick either way.

`workflow_dispatch` is offered but the upload assumed a tag. Fired from a
branch it would have created a release named "main".

README's status paragraph still said authentication, budgets and the control
plane were missing. It now says what is actually left, including the part
worth saying out loud: the InfiniBand, NVML and NCCL paths have never run on
a machine that has any of them.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
2026-09-18 00:29:15 +02:00

156 lines
5.9 KiB
Markdown

# llmgw
A single-binary LLM gateway for clusters with multiple InfiniBand fabrics and
heterogeneous GPUs.
It serves LLMs running on your own GPU servers (vLLM / SGLang) behind one
OpenAI-compatible endpoint. Design document: [llmgw-plan.md](llmgw-plan.md).
## Getting started
Starting from nothing — no packages installed, no drivers, no nodes — follow
[docs/install.md](docs/install.md): it builds a control plane, adds a node and
serves a model, and says plainly which parts llmgw does not install for you.
| Guide | For |
|---|---|
| [docs/install.md](docs/install.md) | Standing up a cluster from scratch |
| [docs/node-onboarding.md](docs/node-onboarding.md) | Adding nodes to one that exists |
| [docs/onboarding.md](docs/onboarding.md) | Giving people accounts and keys |
## Status
Releases track the roadmap phases; see [CHANGELOG.md](CHANGELOG.md).
| Version | Phase | Scope | State |
|---|---|---|---|
| v0.1.0 | 0 | Skeleton and sim-engine | released |
| v0.2.0 | 1 | Static router (filter/score/pick, streaming proxy) | released |
| v0.3.0 | 1.5 | Admission control (priority bands) | released |
| v0.4.0 | 2 | Agent: GPU/IB discovery, engine supervision | released |
| v0.5.0 | 3 | Control plane: catalog, placement, reconciler, ctl | released |
| v0.6.0 | 4 | Multi-node placement and fabric awareness | released |
| v1.0.0 | 5 | Tenancy, prefix affinity, benchmarking | planned |
As of v0.6.0 a cluster runs unattended: agents report their hardware, the
control plane places replicas — including ones larger than a single machine —
models load when someone asks for them and stop when nobody does, and keys,
budgets and rate limits decide who may use any of it.
Before v1.0.0: routing profiles selectable per request, spillover to a fallback
pool, tracing, and reference documentation. One thing is worth saying plainly:
multi-node replicas are proven on a simulated cluster and on real hardware
without a fabric. The InfiniBand, NVML and NCCL paths are written against the
formats and failure modes those tools actually have, but they have not yet run
on a machine that has them.
## Building
```sh
make build # bin/llmgw
make test # unit tests
make race # with the race detector
```
## Operating a cluster
```sh
llmgw ctl nodes # capacity, health, what is running where
llmgw ctl models # catalog and replica counts
llmgw ctl replicas --model llama # replicas and their shards
llmgw ctl explain-placement llama # why a model has not been placed
llmgw ctl drain gpu-a-01 # move work off a node, one replica at a time
llmgw ctl cordon gpu-a-01 # stop new placement, leave what runs
```
`ctl` talks to the admin port (`:9090` by default), not the client-facing one.
Add `--json` to any command for machine-readable output.
`explain-placement` is the one worth knowing about: "unschedulable" on its own
says nothing about which of six constraints bit, so it prints every candidate
considered and the reason it was rejected.
## Running the router
```sh
# Two fake engines and a router in front of them.
./bin/llmgw sim-engine --listen :8001 --model llama &
./bin/llmgw sim-engine --listen :8002 --model llama &
./bin/llmgw server \
--endpoint e1=http://127.0.0.1:8001=llama \
--endpoint e2=http://127.0.0.1:8002=llama
curl -N localhost:8080/v1/chat/completions \
-H 'content-type: application/json' \
-H 'x-session-id: demo' \
-d '{"model":"llama","messages":[{"role":"user","content":"hello"}],"stream":true}'
```
For anything real use a config file; [deploy/examples/server.yaml](deploy/examples/server.yaml)
is commented throughout. Metrics, health and pprof are on the admin port (`:9090`
by default), deliberately separate from the client-facing one.
Requests carry a priority band (`x-llmgw-band`). Under load, low bands wait at
the gateway while high bands keep flowing, so the cluster degrades from the
bottom up instead of everywhere at once. Measured effect: interactive p99 stays
within 1.24x of idle while 500 concurrent batch requests run, against 58x with
admission off.
Routing profiles select how endpoints are scored: `chat` favours session
affinity, `batch` favours the shortest queue, `long-context` favours free KV
cache. Pick one per model in the config, or per request with the
`x-llmgw-profile` header.
## sim-engine
Simulates the inference-engine behaviours **the router cares about**, so the
router can be developed and tested without GPUs. What it models:
- continuous batching (bounded number of concurrent sequences)
- KV cache block accounting, queueing once blocks run out (head-of-line
blocking included)
- automatic prefix caching (chained block hashes plus an LRU) and its effect
on time to first token
- per-token latency growing with batch size
- dropping a request and freeing its blocks when the client disconnects
- `/metrics` using vLLM's metric names
```sh
./bin/llmgw sim-engine --listen :8000 --model llama-3.3-70b
curl -N localhost:8000/v1/chat/completions \
-H 'content-type: application/json' \
-d '{"messages":[{"role":"user","content":"hello"}],"max_tokens":8,"stream":true}'
```
Tune load and latency behaviour with `--max-num-seqs`, `--num-gpu-blocks`,
`--prefill-tps`, `--decode-tps`, `--batch-contention` and
`--prefix-cache-blocks`. For chaos testing use `--fail-rate`, and `--seed` for
deterministic runs.
### The engine metric contract
For the router to make routing decisions an engine **must** expose these three
metrics (plan §7.6). sim-engine publishes them under vLLM's real names:
```
vllm:num_requests_running
vllm:num_requests_waiting
vllm:kv_cache_usage_perc
```
Adding support for a new engine means satisfying that contract. Metric names
drift between versions, so the name mapping is configurable.
## Module path
`gitea.mynodes.xyz/ilker/llmgw`. To change it:
```sh
make rename NEW=git.example.com/team/llmgw
```
## Language
Code, comments, tests, commit messages and documentation are in English.