Skip to content
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

Add support for svclb pod PriorityClassName #10045

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 23, 2024

Conversation

brandond
Copy link
Member

@brandond brandond commented Apr 29, 2024

Proposed Changes

Add support for svclb pod PriorityClassName

At this point I would prefer not to add another CLI flag to control the default priorityClassName, but you can override it on a per-service basis via an annotation. The annotation can be set to an empty value if svclb pods for that service should not have a priorityClassName set.

Types of Changes

enhancement

Verification

See linked issue

Testing

Linked Issues

User-Facing Change

ServiceLB now sets the priorityClassName on svclb pods to `system-node-critical` by default. This can be overridden on a per-service basis via the `svccontroller.k3s.cattle.io/priorityclassname` annotation.

Further Comments

@brandond brandond requested a review from a team as a code owner April 29, 2024 19:42
Copy link

codecov bot commented Apr 29, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 88.88889% with 2 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 42.85%. Comparing base (94e29e2) to head (e5ff47c).
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Files Patch % Lines
pkg/cloudprovider/servicelb.go 71.42% 1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master   #10045      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   50.07%   42.85%   -7.23%     
==========================================
  Files         158      158              
  Lines       14032    14041       +9     
==========================================
- Hits         7027     6017    -1010     
- Misses       5676     6888    +1212     
+ Partials     1329     1136     -193     
Flag Coverage Δ
e2etests 36.37% <88.88%> (-10.21%) ⬇️
inttests 19.25% <33.33%> (-17.91%) ⬇️
unittests 16.58% <33.33%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

Signed-off-by: Brad Davidson <brad.davidson@rancher.com>
Copy link
Member

@dereknola dereknola left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We are gonna need to open a docs PR on this.

@brandond
Copy link
Member Author

btrfs test flaked; merging

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants