The label value of the dependent resoucebinding over 63 characters

[mathlsj]

The dependent resourcebinding label value consists of three components namspace+"_"+name+"-"+kind. it is easy to over 63 characters. we need to split it into three labels:
resourcebinding.karmada.io/depended-by-hash.namespace: namespace
resourcebinding.karmada.io/depended-by-hash.name: name
resourcebinding.karmada.io/depended-by-hash.kind: kind

[RainbowMango]

Can you help point out which label we are talking about here?

[mathlsj]

generate resourcebinding depended label in dependencies_distributor (https://github.com/karmada-io/karmada/blob/master/pkg/dependenciesdistributor/dependencies_distributor.go)

func generateBindingDependedByLabel(bindingNamespace, bindingName string) map[string]string {
	labelKey := generateBindingDependedByLabelKey(bindingNamespace, bindingName)
        # labelValue = ns +"_" + bindingName (name + "-" + kind)
	labelValue := fmt.Sprintf(bindingNamespace + "_" + bindingName)
	return map[string]string{labelKey: labelValue}
}

[RainbowMango]

Right, here probably exceed 64 characters. May I know what the name and namespace look like in your system?

[RainbowMango]

Hi @mathlsj I see you send a PR for this.
I'd like to invite the author to talk about the solution. @mrlihanbo

[mathlsj]

OK。

[mathlsj]

@RainbowMango What is the progress of this?

[RainbowMango]

I'm sorry I missed this from my radar. I'll be back on this next week.

[RainbowMango]

Right, here probably exceed 64 characters. May I know what the name and namespace look like in your system?

@mathlsj Can you give an example of your name and namespace?

[RainbowMango]

we need to split it into three labels:
resourcebinding.karmada.io/depended-by-hash.namespace: namespace
resourcebinding.karmada.io/depended-by-hash.name: name
resourcebinding.karmada.io/depended-by-hash.kind: kind

Split the label could relieve the issue, but I'm afraid it can't solve the problem fundamentally, because the name itself may exceed 63 characters.

Investigation still on-going.

[RainbowMango]

I've got two solutions here:

1. Instead of putting the key resourcebinding.karmada.io/depended-by-xxx to a label, we can put it in the annotations.

For doing this, we can't use the label selector to list all the dependencies at listAttachedBindings, maybe we can use MatchingFieldsSelector.

2. Deprecate the key by extending the ResourceBinding API to build the connection between main RB and attached RBs.

I didn't verify any of the two solutions yet, just an idea.

[mathlsj]

I tend to use the first one.

I was thinking if there was any other solution to it?

[RainbowMango]

I was thinking if there was any other solution to it?

Looking forward to hear more solutions.
My concern about the two solutions is the performance, you know there could be a huge mount of RBs in the system.

[mathlsj]

I am sorry. i was so busy before. i will deal it continue.

[RainbowMango]

I'm trying to figure out which PR/Issue should be included in the coming v1.7 release which is planned at the end of this month.
I guess we don't have enough time for this feature, so I'm moving this to v1.8.

Note that @jwcesign is leading the effort for this, see #4000 for the progress.

[RainbowMango]

@XiShanYongYe-Chang Can you confirm if this issue is fixed?

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

The current issue has not been resolved. This is a separate label. This label is not analyzed in #4000. I will use this idea and the resolution experience in #4000 to continue to promote this issue.

/assign

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

/kind bug

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

Hi @mathlsj, this issue has been solved, would you like to have a try?