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
fix(controller): Fix incorrect main container customization precedence and isResourcesSpecified check #4681
Merged
alexec
merged 9 commits into
argoproj:master
from
terrytangyuan:fix-main-container-config
Dec 11, 2020
Merged
fix(controller): Fix incorrect main container customization precedence and isResourcesSpecified check #4681
alexec
merged 9 commits into
argoproj:master
from
terrytangyuan:fix-main-container-config
Dec 11, 2020
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…e and isResourcesSpecified check Signed-off-by: terrytangyuan <terrytangyuan@gmail.com>
/cc @alexec |
Signed-off-by: terrytangyuan <terrytangyuan@gmail.com>
terrytangyuan
commented
Dec 9, 2020
@@ -607,7 +609,7 @@ func (woc *wfOperationCtx) newExecContainer(name string, tmpl *wfv1.Template) *a | |||
} | |||
|
|||
func isResourcesSpecified(ctr *apiv1.Container) bool { | |||
return ctr != nil && (ctr.Resources.Limits.Cpu() != nil || ctr.Resources.Limits.Memory() != nil) | |||
return ctr != nil && len(ctr.Resources.Limits) != 0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there any reasoning I missed from the current logic? Please help double check this change here. At least the results from the new test cases look fine and expected to me.
alexec
approved these changes
Dec 9, 2020
This was referenced Dec 15, 2020
simster7
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 17, 2020
…e and isResourcesSpecified check (#4681) Signed-off-by: terrytangyuan <terrytangyuan@gmail.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This is a follow-up PR of #4656. Changes include:
isResourcesSpecified()
always returnsTrue
even when resources isapiv1.ResourceRequirements{Limits: apiv1.ResourceList{}}
. This is because this case the defaults are"0"
s. The current code checks whether the resources arenil
which is alwaysFalse
since"k8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/api/resource".Quantity
cannot be converted tonil
. Additional tests are added.Signed-off-by: terrytangyuan terrytangyuan@gmail.com
Checklist: