interface: add APIs for rebalancing #912
Conversation
|
Internal only: please also see the mini UX doc for further details about this API (ping me if a link hasn't been sent). |
| // | ||
| // The execution of the rebalacing operation is subject to the rollout strategy defined | ||
| // in the ClusterResourcePlacement object. This behavior is akin to editing the placement policy | ||
| // of the ClusterResourcePlacement object; disruption budget would not apply to this operation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
"disruption budget would not apply to this operation" Why not? Is that because customers don't want disruption budget to be enforced, or we can't achieve it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We are following K8s behavior https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/disruptions/. PDB only protect against disruptions like eviction API. Also, since rebalance follows the same rollout logic in CRP, it won't violate the minimum number of copies policy
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Disruption budget applies to all voluntary disruptions including "updating a deployment's pod template causing a restart", except for a few like deleting a deployment or a pod directly.
I thing this rebalance API belongs to voluntary disruptions.
Could you elaborate more on the k8s behavior you have in mind?
| // * True: the rebalancing attempt is valid. | ||
| // * False: the rebalancing attempt is invalid; it might be targeting a CRP that does not | ||
| // exist yet, or has been marked for deletion. | ||
| // Note thate this ia a terminal state; once the rebalancing attempt is deemed invalid, |
| // | ||
| // The execution of the rebalacing operation is subject to the rollout strategy defined | ||
| // in the ClusterResourcePlacement object. This behavior is akin to editing the placement policy | ||
| // of the ClusterResourcePlacement object; disruption budget would not apply to this operation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We are following K8s behavior https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/disruptions/. PDB only protect against disruptions like eviction API. Also, since rebalance follows the same rollout logic in CRP, it won't violate the minimum number of copies policy
| // Executed rebalancing attempts might be kept around for a while for auditing purposes; the | ||
| // Fleet controllers might have a TTL set up for such objects and will garbage collect them | ||
| // automatically. For further information, see the Fleet documentation. | ||
| type ClusterResourcePlacementRebalance struct { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| type ClusterResourcePlacementRebalance struct { | |
| type PlacementRebalance struct { |
| // | ||
| // The execution of the rebalacing operation is subject to the rollout strategy defined | ||
| // in the ClusterResourcePlacement object. This behavior is akin to editing the placement policy | ||
| // of the ClusterResourcePlacement object; disruption budget would not apply to this operation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Disruption budget applies to all voluntary disruptions including "updating a deployment's pod template causing a restart", except for a few like deleting a deployment or a pod directly.
I thing this rebalance API belongs to voluntary disruptions.
Could you elaborate more on the k8s behavior you have in mind?
|
|
||
| // Status is the observed state of the ClusterResourcePlacementRebalance object. | ||
| // +optional | ||
| Status ClusterResourcePlacementRebalanceStatus `json:"status,omitempty"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| Status ClusterResourcePlacementRebalanceStatus `json:"status,omitempty"` | |
| Status PlacementRebalanceStatus `json:"status,omitempty"` |
Description of your changes
This PR adds APIs for supporting rebalancing attempts in Fleet.
I have:
make reviewableto ensure this PR is ready for review.How has this code been tested
N/A
Special notes for your reviewer
N/A