How Effective is vLLM When a Prefix Is Thrown Into the Mix? | HackerNoon

Table of Links

Abstract and 1 Introduction

2 Background and 2.1 Transformer-Based Large Language Models

2.2 LLM Service & Autoregressive Generation

2.3 Batching Techniques for LLMs

3 Memory Challenges in LLM Serving

3.1 Memory Management in Existing Systems

4 Method and 4.1 PagedAttention

4.2 KV Cache Manager

4.3 Decoding with PagedAttention and vLLM

4.4 Application to Other Decoding Scenarios

4.5 Scheduling and Preemption

4.6 Distributed Execution

5 Implementation

6 Evaluation and 6.1 Experimental Setup

6.2 Basic Sampling

6.3 Parallel Sampling and Beam Search

6.4 Shared prefix

6.5 Chatbot

7 Ablation Studies

8 Discussion

9 Related Work

10 Conclusion, Acknowledgement and References

6.4 Shared prefix

We explore the effectiveness of vLLM for the case a prefix is shared among different input prompts, as illustrated in

Fig. 10. For the model, we use LLaMA-13B [52], which is multilingual. For the workload, we use the WMT16 [4] Englishto-German translation dataset and synthesize two prefixes that include an instruction and a few translation examples. The first prefix includes a single example (i.e., one-shot) while the other prefix includes 5 examples (i.e., few-shot). As shown in Fig. 16 (a), vLLM achieves 1.67× higher throughput than Orca (Oracle) when the one-shot prefix is shared. Furthermore, when more examples are shared (Fig. 16 (b)), vLLM achieves 3.58× higher throughput than Orca (Oracle).