Record the fairness decision for small and large report tenants
A single tenant's weekly exports occupy every available slot while small interactive reports wait behind them.
- Focused work estimate
- 2h + prerequisites
- Priority in the scenario
- Medium
- Engineering practice
- Scheduling tradeoffs · Fairness
Estimated field mix
- System design60%
- Distributed systems40%
Field percentages are editorial estimates of the ticket's engineering focus. They total 100%; they are not measured time, proficiency scores, or ownership evidence.
Review it, then add it to your workspace.
The board opens an editable draft; nothing is saved until you confirm it. Sign-in and workspace permissions apply, and Demo boards remain ephemeral.
Project context
A fictional analytics product lets customers schedule expensive reports at the top of the hour. The API remains available only if report work is admitted and cancelled predictably.
Setup prerequisites
- Create a local scheduler model and synthetic report jobs.
- Use fake execution providers; no customer queries or candidate code run on worker hosts.
Preceding work
Complete these dependencies, or supply their agreed outputs before taking this ticket.
Acceptance criteria
- Compare FIFO, per-tenant limits and weighted scheduling.
- Define fairness and starvation expectations.
- Document how unknown report cost is classified.
Implementation constraints
- Use a small synthetic tenant set and avoid hiring or user scoring.
Verification to include
- Evaluate a mixed small/large workload against the chosen rule.
- Show the behavior when one tenant continuously submits work.
Deliverables
- Fairness decision record
Rollout and recovery
Review the chosen policy with the workload model; retain configuration for bounded tuning.
Value of the work
For the engineer: Practice workload modeling, fairness and cancellation architecture.
For the team: Review controllable operating costs and predictable customer-facing overload behavior.
Evidence boundaries
Outcome Evidence: Tests, patches, and runbooks are requested deliverables. They become Outcome Evidence only through a qualified Mission and immutable Evidence IDs.
Ownership Evidence: Independent adaptation must be observed under a declared verification policy and cite immutable Evidence IDs. Completing a planning ticket establishes no Ownership Evidence.