-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
📖 Proposal: MachineDrainRules #11241
📖 Proposal: MachineDrainRules #11241
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Stefan Büringer [email protected]
Loving this solution for CAPI-11024, great work! |
For more on the label vs. annotation thinking, see kubernetes/kubernetes#127247 (comment) |
Kubernetes is open source; anyone can propose registering an annotation (all it needs is a PR against https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/labels-annotations-taints/) |
I'm aware it's open source 😀. I assumed that these would typically be defined through KEPs |
There is one more use case that we've seen with a customer, I was wondering if this could be facilitated by MachineDrainRules as well. We had a customer that ran gaming sessions (Minecraft) in Kubernetes, so a pod would represent an active game in progress. When the customer wanted to e.g. upgrade Kubernetes, they needed to change the upgrade strategy in the If MachineDrainRules supported something like a "WaitForCompletion" mode of draining (for pods matching certain labels), a customer like this could configure a rule that made CAPI wait until pods matching the "wait" labels are naturally terminated. This would enable a node drain to function as follows:
While this could make repaves take a long time when such a wait rule is configured, it is still much preferable over having to manage the drains entirely manually. There could even be a wait timeout setting that sets a maximum amount of time that the system will wait for such pods to terminate naturally, before draining them anyway. |
Doesn't this already work for upgrades?
|
I suppose using PDBs would indeed work to make the drain process wait for the pods to terminate naturally. Thanks for the tip 👍🏻 |
511ddd2
to
aa3ea2b
Compare
All findings should be addressed via aa3ea2b PTAL :) |
/lgtm |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: c816aab3eef91dbcb5aa0b278bf841bf06e5fa66
|
As per Oct 9th office hours, lazy consensus deadline set for next Friday (Oct 18th) |
/lgtm |
Signed-off-by: Stefan Büringer [email protected]
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
/lgtm |
Great to see we reached consensus for this first iteration! |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Signed-off-by: Stefan Büringer [email protected]
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Part of #11240