inference/research
verifiedhigh · 0.86updated 2026-10-03

llm-d

cuda, rocm

Fields

id
engines/llm-d
Repo
llm-d/llm-d
Languages
PythonShell
License
Apache-2.0
First release
2025
Design goal
throughput-firstlow-latencyKubernetes-native production servingvendor-neutral orchestrationoperational excellence
Scheduling
prefix-cacheload-aware routingpredicted-latency schedulingdisaggregated-prefill-decodetiered-prefix-cachewide-expert-parallelism
Backends
cudarocm
Formats
safetensorsawqgptq
Notable features
CNCF sandbox project founded by Red Hat, Google Cloud, IBM Research, CoreWeave and NVIDIA - deliberately vendor-neutral where Dynamo is NVIDIA-originatedSame layering as Dynamo: orchestration and optimisation ABOVE vLLM and SGLang, which 'handle efficiently running large language models on accelerators'Intelligent routing: prefix-cache- and load-aware balancing, plus experimental predicted-latency-based schedulingAdvanced KV-cache management: 'tiered offloading to CPU or disk and precise global indexing of the KV cache state' to increase the effective working set for multi-turn requestsPD disaggregation combined with wide expert parallelism for very large models (DeepSeek-R1, GPT-OSS class)SLO-aware autoscaling from live inference signals, intelligent flow control for multi-tenancy, and OpenAI-compatible Batch APIsWell-lit-path guides with benchmarked recipes and Helm charts, plus accelerator/network/configuration matrices
Hardware caveats
Kubernetes is the deployment substrate; the differentiator is Helm/operator work, so a bare-metal shop gains lessVendor-neutral in governance, but the tested recipes and partner benchmarks are NVIDIA- and AMD-centric; other accelerators are 'points of contact' rather than benchmarked pathsPrefix-cache-aware routing only pays if replicas actually share prefixes - without a shared KV index the routing decision is guesswork
Best for
Kubernetes production serving where PD disaggregation and tiered KV need to be operated rather than hand-rolledShops that want disaggregation without betting on a single vendor's stack, given the CNCF governance and multi-vendor foundingMulti-turn or long-context workloads where the effective KV working set exceeds per-replica HBM
Avoid for
Non-Kubernetes deployments - the value is in the operator, planner and guidesSingle-node serving, where none of the four themes applyWorkloads with no prefix locality, where prefix-cache-aware routing adds a hop for no reuse
notes
KV transfer path: llm-d does not define its own transport - it composes the engines' connectors (NIXL/UCX, Mooncake) for the PD handoff and implements its own GPU->CPU/disk tiering with a global KV index. Partner-reported performance claims in the README, attributed as such: 'Up to 70% higher tokens/sec with prefill/decode disaggregation vs standard vLLM - GPT-OSS on NVIDIA B200 (p6-b200), AWS'; '10-30% throughput improvement with disaggregated serving on identical infrastructure - GPT-OSS-120B and Llama 3.3 70B on AMD MI300X, Oracle'; '3x higher output throughput and 2x faster TTFT with prefix-cache-aware routing vs round-robin - Llama 3.1 70B on 4x AMD MI300X, Tesla / Red Hat'; '40% reduction in TTFT and ITL with predicted-latency scheduling vs heuristics on NVIDIA GPUs, Google'. These are vendor blog figures, not independent measurements, and the PD number is a throughput comparison that vLLM's own docs would call into question ('Disaggregated prefill DOES NOT improve throughput' - a claim about a fixed-SLO single-node setup, so the two are not measuring the same thing). Recorded as a production system, not a paper, but with the caveat that most of its published numbers come from partners. ||| MAINTENANCE (dated fact, GitHub API, 2026-10-04): last commit 2026-10-02 (0.1 months), latest release v0.10.0 published 2026-09-29, 224 contributors, open_issues_count 187 (issues PLUS pull requests - low relative to a large contributor base), NOT archived, 4722 stars. DEPLOYMENT: NO EVIDENCE OF PRODUCTION DEPLOYMENT FOUND as of 2026-10-04 - see [[ev-production-evidence-is-scarce-and-nearly-always-single-site]]. Note that this is a weaker negative than for a small library: the README publishes an offline batch-inference throughput TUNING GUIDE with a worked example (a log line showing 'Decode batch. #running-req: 233, #token: 370959, token usage: 0.82, cuda graph: True, gen throughput (token/s): 4594.01, #queue-req: 317'), which is evidence that operators tune this engine seriously but is explicitly a configuration guide, not a report of anyone's deployment. FEATURE AXES: all seven UNSTATED as of 2026-10-04. Its open issue #2665 (2026-10-03, same day as this record) proposes reorganizing its 'Well-Lit Paths' into Foundations, Models and Operations, which is itself a signal that the project's shape is still settling and that axis answers derived from any current doc may move.

Notes

KV transfer path: llm-d does not define its own transport - it composes the engines' connectors (NIXL/UCX, Mooncake) for the PD handoff and implements its own GPU->CPU/disk tiering with a global KV index. Partner-reported performance claims in the README, attributed as such: 'Up to 70% higher tokens/sec with prefill/decode disaggregation vs standard vLLM - GPT-OSS on NVIDIA B200 (p6-b200), AWS'; '10-30% throughput improvement with disaggregated serving on identical infrastructure - GPT-OSS-120B and Llama 3.3 70B on AMD MI300X, Oracle'; '3x higher output throughput and 2x faster TTFT with prefix-cache-aware routing vs round-robin - Llama 3.1 70B on 4x AMD MI300X, Tesla / Red Hat'; '40% reduction in TTFT and ITL with predicted-latency scheduling vs heuristics on NVIDIA GPUs, Google'. These are vendor blog figures, not independent measurements, and the PD number is a throughput comparison that vLLM's own docs would call into question ('Disaggregated prefill DOES NOT improve throughput' - a claim about a fixed-SLO single-node setup, so the two are not measuring the same thing). Recorded as a production system, not a paper, but with the caveat that most of its published numbers come from partners. ||| MAINTENANCE (dated fact, GitHub API, 2026-10-04): last commit 2026-10-02 (0.1 months), latest release v0.10.0 published 2026-09-29, 224 contributors, open_issues_count 187 (issues PLUS pull requests - low relative to a large contributor base), NOT archived, 4722 stars. DEPLOYMENT: NO EVIDENCE OF PRODUCTION DEPLOYMENT FOUND as of 2026-10-04 - see [[ev-production-evidence-is-scarce-and-nearly-always-single-site]]. Note that this is a weaker negative than for a small library: the README publishes an offline batch-inference throughput TUNING GUIDE with a worked example (a log line showing 'Decode batch. #running-req: 233, #token: 370959, token usage: 0.82, cuda graph: True, gen throughput (token/s): 4594.01, #queue-req: 317'), which is evidence that operators tune this engine seriously but is explicitly a configuration guide, not a report of anyone's deployment. FEATURE AXES: all seven UNSTATED as of 2026-10-04. Its open issue #2665 (2026-10-03, same day as this record) proposes reorganizing its 'Well-Lit Paths' into Foundations, Models and Operations, which is itself a signal that the project's shape is still settling and that axis answers derived from any current doc may move.

Cross-references

This record references no other records — it is a leaf. It is cited by 15.