arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2609.24991

Who Pays for the KV Cache? Attributing Shared AI Inference Spend Across Kubernetes and LLM Provider Bills

Timothy Urista
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Organizations pay for AI through disconnected ledgers: Kubernetes allocations for self-hosted inference, gateway logs, and per-token bills from API providers. We present unalloc, an open-source tool that joins OpenCost, LiteLLM, OpenAI and Anthropic cost data into one exact ledger and reports the share of spend with no owner, and use it to study where attribution breaks at the seams between these systems. Five case studies run inference for real or simulate it: a vLLM-style serving simulator with paged KV memory and prefix caching; a PyTorch transformer serving a multi-tenant trace with a real KV cache; tensor- and pipeline-parallel inference on torch.distributed; the unmodified CLI against mock provider APIs; and four downstream use cases. At the seams, in a constructed multi-pod deployment scenario -- one month of synthetic OpenCost allocations, not observed billing data -- owner labels set only on LeaderWorkerSet leader pods leave 66% of that deployment's GPU bill unowned, and the natural fallback key assigns 61% of it to a Helm chart name while the headline unallocated share falls to 4%; enabling every source double counts all gateway spend; and reading one page of a billing API reports a quarter of spend. Inside a shared inference server the metering rule decides who pays: on an NVIDIA H100 running vLLM, a token meter assigns a retrieval-heavy tenant 12-14 percentage points more of the bill than an equal time-share meter at every load tested, while GPU utilization reads 97-99% across configured loads of 2 to 16 requests per second (3.7 to 26.9 completed requests per second; the configured rate counts session-initial arrivals only) and power draw tracks load. Neither meter is a ground truth; we position these results against recent Shapley-based energy attribution. Code, raw data, captured evidence, figures and the paper regenerate from the repository.

Explore related subjects

cs.DCcs.PF

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Timothy Urista. 2026-09-21. Who Pays for the KV Cache? Attributing Shared AI Inference Spend Across Kubernetes and LLM Provider Bills. https://arxiv.org/abs/2609.24991

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Reforge: Low-Latency Distributed GNN Serving with Selective Embedding Recomputation

Graph Neural Networks (GNNs) have been widely adopted for their ability to compute expressive node representations in graph datasets. However, serving GNNs on large graphs is challenging due to the high communication, computation, and memory overheads of constructing and executing computation graphs, which represent information flow across large neighborhoods. Existing approximation techniques in training can mitigate the overheads but, in serving, still lead to high latency and/or accuracy loss. To this end, we propose Reforge, a system that enables low-latency GNN serving for large graphs with minimal accuracy loss through two key ideas. First, Reforge employs selective recomputation of precomputed embeddings, which allows for reusing precomputed computation subgraphs while selectively recomputing a small fraction to minimize accuracy loss. Second, we develop computation graph parallelism, which reduces communication overhead by parallelizing the creation and execution of computation graphs across machines. Our evaluation with large graph datasets and GNN models shows that Reforge significantly outperforms state-of-the-art techniques.

cs.DC↗
arXiv2026

Agentic AI Workload Characteristics

Agentic AI shifts LLM serving from isolated prompt-generation requests to stateful, multi-turn executions that repeatedly invoke the model, call tools, and grow context over time. This paper characterizes ReAct-style agents from both the LLM-serving and tool-execution perspectives using an end-to-end tracing infrastructure across reasoning and non-reasoning Gemma and Qwen configurations on five agentic benchmarks. Our study shows that agentic workloads are not simply long-prompt workloads: with effective context caching, most input tokens are reused across turns, making execution decode-dominated while increasing dependence on long-lived KV-cache state. We also find that tool use has a clear temporal structure, with agents shifting from read/explore behavior early in execution to execute/write behavior later. These results show that efficient agentic serving must jointly manage repeated model re-entry, persistent context state, and workload-dependent tool behavior.

cs.DC↗
arXiv2026

Byzantine Causal Reliable Broadcast (BCRB) with Constant-Size Message Metadata

Asynchronous Byzantine Reliable Broadcast (BRB) is a fundamental primitive that guarantees agreement and validity in distributed systems subject to Byzantine faults, but it lacks ordering guarantees. In this paper, we address Byzantine Causal Reliable Broadcast (BCRB), which builds on BRB to enforce causal message ordering. We present a novel BCRB protocol that decouples causal ordering from the BRB layer, achieving constant-size $\mathcal{O}(1)$ message metadata overhead and $\mathcal{O}(n^2)$ communication word complexity as against $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$ communication word complexity of existing protocols; here $n$ is the number of processes. We present two variants of our protocol: a cryptographic version using a threshold encryption scheme and sequence gating, and its non-cryptographic version. In the cryptographic version, senders broadcast ciphertexts immediately, and decryption shares are piggybacked on out-of-band ACKs, preventing early decryption and front-running. In both versions, causal safety is achieved probabilistically. We evaluate the probability of causal safety violations using a random variable path analysis under independent exponential link delay distributions. We show that both variants satisfy liveness and the probability of weak safety violation is bounded by $\mathcal{O}(f^{-3}\cdot\ln^3 f)$, where $f$ is the upper bound on the number of Byzantine processes, and $f < n/3$ and $f=\mathcal{O}(n)$. Further, for the crypto version, we show that the probability of strong safety violation is bounded by $\mathcal{O}(f^{-1} \cdot \ln^2 f)$. We also show how to modify our two protocols to guarantee 100\% weak safety keeping $\mathcal{O}(1)$ message space overhead but with $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$ messages and $\mathcal{O}(n^3)$ communication word complexity.

cs.DC↗