inference/research
draftmedium · 0.65updated 2026-10-04

PackServe: SLO-Aware Request Scheduling for Agentic LLM Serving at Scale

scheduling · arxiv
This record is a draft. Not yet verified. Provisional. Treat every number on this page as provisional.

Fields

id
papers/packserve-agentic-scheduling
arXiv
2609.33224
Venue
arxiv-preprint
Venue track
unknown
Year
2026
Category
scheduling
Adoption
unknown
Authors
Zhiyuan TanDejiang ZhuJingzhe JiangYihao ZhengYang TianTao WangMinchen Yu
Affiliations
Microsoft Research AsiaPeking University
Problem
Agentic workloads reuse KV cache across long shared prefixes, so naive request consolidation onto fewer instances trades away cache locality and prefill/decode interference, wrecking both SLO attainment and GPU efficiency at the same time.
Mechanism
Use compact white-box models to PREDICT latency under prefill/decode interference, then pack requests onto fewer serving instances subject to preserving KVC reuse and the token-level SLO — explicitly trading unused latency headroom for higher per-instance throughput. The white-box predictor is what makes safe packing possible without over-provisioning.
Speedup reported
Per the arXiv abstract, on 64 NVIDIA H20 GPUs: up to 16.8% and 24.6% fewer GPU-hours than state-of-the-art schedulers under 30-ms and 50-ms TPOT targets respectively, while still meeting the target TPOT objectives. Note this is a COST/footprint reduction at equal latency, not a raw throughput multiple, and the hardware is H20 — a memory-capacity-and-bandwidth-constrained part, so read the result as evidence that scheduling efficiency can substitute for buying more accelerators.
notes
Recorded adoption as 'unknown' rather than 'in-production' even though the abstract says the authors deployed it in their own environment: a paper's claim of internal deployment is not evidence a reader can use, and I could not verify a public repo or release. Venue deliberately 'arxiv-preprint' — the arXiv comment states only a page and figure count, with no venue. This is the clearest current example of the packing-vs-cache-locality tension that post-2024 agentic serving is fighting. VENUE_TRACK BACKFILL 2026-10-04 (paper-fields pass, agent w3p): venue_track 'unknown'. `venue` is 'arxiv-preprint', which means no peer-reviewed venue has been established for this work as of the verification date, so the track genuinely is not known. 'unknown' is used here rather than leaving the field null or guessing 'main': the schema separates 'unknown' from 'main' precisely so that an unprereviewed preprint is not silently counted as main-track work. This annotation is what lets a downstream filter distinguish 'peer reviewed, main track' from 'not peer reviewed' without inferring it from the venue string.

Notes

Recorded adoption as 'unknown' rather than 'in-production' even though the abstract says the authors deployed it in their own environment: a paper's claim of internal deployment is not evidence a reader can use, and I could not verify a public repo or release. Venue deliberately 'arxiv-preprint' — the arXiv comment states only a page and figure count, with no venue. This is the clearest current example of the packing-vs-cache-locality tension that post-2024 agentic serving is fighting.

VENUE_TRACK BACKFILL 2026-10-04 (paper-fields pass, agent w3p): venue_track 'unknown'. `venue` is 'arxiv-preprint', which means no peer-reviewed venue has been established for this work as of the verification date, so the track genuinely is not known. 'unknown' is used here rather than leaving the field null or guessing 'main': the schema separates 'unknown' from 'main' precisely so that an unprereviewed preprint is not silently counted as main-track work. This annotation is what lets a downstream filter distinguish 'peer reviewed, main track' from 'not peer reviewed' without inferring it from the venue string.

Cross-references

Hardware relevance (1)