Ensure the latest schedulerObservedGeneration if do not need to schedule #3455

Poor12 · 2023-04-23T08:24:35Z

What type of PR is this?
/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
Ensure the latest schedulerObservedGeneration if do not need to schedule.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #3454
Fixes #3467

Special notes for your reviewer:
This PR need to cherry-pick.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

`karmada-scheduler`: Fixed the issue of inconsistent Generation and SchedulerObservedGeneration.

Poor12 · 2023-04-23T08:24:53Z

/assign @XiShanYongYe-Chang

codecov-commenter · 2023-04-23T08:41:45Z

Codecov Report

Merging #3455 (9ee205f) into master (48e93dc) will increase coverage by 1.65%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

📣 This organization is not using Codecov’s GitHub App Integration. We recommend you install it so Codecov can continue to function properly for your repositories. Learn more

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3455      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   51.94%   53.59%   +1.65%     
==========================================
  Files         210      210              
  Lines       19077    19176      +99     
==========================================
+ Hits         9910    10278     +368     
+ Misses       8618     8346     -272     
- Partials      549      552       +3

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	`53.59% <0.00%> (+1.65%)`	⬆️

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go	`18.00% <0.00%> (-0.11%)`	⬇️

... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

XiShanYongYe-Chang

Thanks~
/lgtm

XiShanYongYe-Chang · 2023-04-23T09:06:03Z

Maybe we need to describe the components in the release-note.

Poor12 · 2023-04-23T09:08:24Z

Maybe we need to describe the components in the release-note.

Done.

Poor12 · 2023-04-24T12:20:11Z

/assign @RainbowMango

RainbowMango

The root cause of this issue is that we are using patch to update the status after we updated the .spec part which will lead generation increasing.

I believe this patch could work around this problem, but it looks like a redundancy design. I wonder if we have another alternative solution. cc @Garrybest for help.

Poor12 · 2023-04-25T09:22:31Z

The root cause of this issue is that we are using patch to update the status after we updated the .spec part which will lead generation increasing.

I believe this patch could work around this problem, but it looks like a redundancy design. I wonder if we have another alternative solution. cc @Garrybest for help.

Another optional idea is that we need to distinguish the situation of scheduler filling in the scheduling result.

Garrybest · 2023-04-25T10:06:47Z

Here is my thought:

Scheduler patches a result hereso rb.generation increases.
Scheduler then patches status here but the rb is obsolete, so we can't update the latest observedGeneration.

Garrybest · 2023-04-25T10:07:28Z

I guess this fucntion could return the latest rb here but we ignore the return value.

Poor12 · 2023-04-25T11:28:32Z

I guess this fucntion could return the latest rb here but we ignore the return value.

I agree with @Garrybest. Ensuring that the binding is the latest binding before patching status is a good solution.

chaunceyjiang · 2023-04-26T04:36:53Z

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

@@ -512,11 +512,13 @@ func (s *Scheduler) patchScheduleResultForResourceBinding(oldBinding *workv1alph
 		return nil
 	}

-	_, err = s.KarmadaClient.WorkV1alpha2().ResourceBindings(newBinding.Namespace).Patch(context.TODO(), newBinding.Name, types.MergePatchType, patchBytes, metav1.PatchOptions{})
+	result, err := s.KarmadaClient.WorkV1alpha2().ResourceBindings(newBinding.Namespace).Patch(context.TODO(), newBinding.Name, types.MergePatchType, patchBytes, metav1.PatchOptions{})
 	if err != nil {


Does this phenomenon still occur with this fix? Would you like to share your steps to reproduce?

You can reproduce it using the steps in the issue description.

I tried using your patch to fix the issue I encountered, but it doesn't seem to have solved it.

I'm trying to reproduce it using the steps in the issue, but it seems the generation and the schedulerObservedGeneration is the same.

chaunceyjiang · 2023-04-26T10:56:03Z

pkg/scheduler/scheduler.go

@@ -512,11 +512,13 @@ func (s *Scheduler) patchScheduleResultForResourceBinding(oldBinding *workv1alph
 		return nil
 	}

-	_, err = s.KarmadaClient.WorkV1alpha2().ResourceBindings(newBinding.Namespace).Patch(context.TODO(), newBinding.Name, types.MergePatchType, patchBytes, metav1.PatchOptions{})


Note: restart karmada-controller-manager will also increment the generation of RB, but it will not enter the scheduling process at this time.

restart karmada-controller-manager will also increment the generation of RB

Why?

@chaunceyjiang is right. Through my analyze, it's mainly because of detector. For resource templates, we add it to the queue directly for adding events. However, for update events, we only add it to queue if spec of resource templates changes for performance.

karmada/pkg/detector/detector.go

Lines 280 to 308 in ec7b3b1

func (d *ResourceDetector) OnAdd(obj interface{}) {

runtimeObj, ok := obj.(runtime.Object)

if !ok {

return

}

d.Processor.Enqueue(runtimeObj)

}

// OnUpdate handles object update event and push the object to queue.

func (d *ResourceDetector) OnUpdate(oldObj, newObj interface{}) {

unstructuredOldObj, err := helper.ToUnstructured(oldObj)

if err != nil {

klog.Errorf("Failed to transform oldObj, error: %v", err)

return

}

unstructuredNewObj, err := helper.ToUnstructured(newObj)

if err != nil {

klog.Errorf("Failed to transform newObj, error: %v", err)

return

}

if !SpecificationChanged(unstructuredOldObj, unstructuredNewObj) {

klog.V(4).Infof("Ignore update event of object (kind=%s, %s/%s) as specification no change", unstructuredOldObj.GetKind(), unstructuredOldObj.GetNamespace(), unstructuredOldObj.GetName())

return

}

d.OnAdd(newObj)

}

After the status is aggregated into the resource template, the resourceVersion in rb.spec.resource is inconsistent with that in the actual resource template. It's currently working without issue. However, when controller-manager restarts, detector will add all resource templates again. So we will update rb.spec.resource.resourceVersion to the latest and then generation +1. But for scheduler, it think it do not need to schedule and not enter the scheduling process. So generation and schedulerObservedGeneration is not the same.

In this case, return the latest binding after patching scheduler results will not work but the former redundancy design works.

but the former redundancy design works.

Yes.

After the status is aggregated into the resource template, the resourceVersion in rb.spec.resource is inconsistent with that in the actual resource template. It's currently working without issue. However, when controller-manager restarts, detector will add all resource templates again. So we will update rb.spec.resource.resourceVersion to the latest and then generation +1.

By the way, currently the graceful-eviction-controller relies too much on this mechanism. I think the graceful-eviction-controller should also handle create event.

#3475

@RainbowMango @Poor12 @RainbowMango What do you think?

I think the graceful-eviction-controller should also handle create event.

What do you mean handle create event?

Do we need to do something else during this PR?

handle create event.

https://github.com/karmada-io/karmada/blob/master/pkg/controllers/gracefuleviction/rb_graceful_eviction_controller.go#L87

Do we need to do something else during this PR?

No, This PR can solve my problem .

Signed-off-by: Poor12 <shentiecheng@huawei.com>

Poor12 · 2023-04-27T03:29:59Z

@chaunceyjiang, could you please help verify whether this fix can solve your problem? Great thanks.

chaunceyjiang · 2023-04-27T03:49:15Z

@chaunceyjiang, could you please help verify whether this fix can solve your problem? Great thanks.

Yes. I also used this patch in my local env.

RainbowMango

/lgtm
/approve

karmada-bot · 2023-04-27T06:12:43Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: RainbowMango

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [RainbowMango]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

chaunceyjiang · 2023-04-27T07:01:19Z

~~BTW, I think this patch should be placed in the binding-controller instead of the scheduler.~~

…pstream-release-1.5 Automated cherry pick of #3455: fix generation inconsistent

karmada-bot added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label Apr 23, 2023

karmada-bot requested review from mrlihanbo and qianjun1993 April 23, 2023 08:24

karmada-bot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Apr 23, 2023

karmada-bot assigned XiShanYongYe-Chang Apr 23, 2023

XiShanYongYe-Chang reviewed Apr 23, 2023

View reviewed changes

karmada-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 23, 2023

karmada-bot assigned RainbowMango Apr 24, 2023

RainbowMango reviewed Apr 25, 2023

View reviewed changes

Poor12 force-pushed the fix-generation-inconsistent branch from 07ad4f3 to 4fcdf7b Compare April 26, 2023 03:24

karmada-bot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Apr 26, 2023

Poor12 force-pushed the fix-generation-inconsistent branch from 4fcdf7b to 3b80fe3 Compare April 26, 2023 03:29

karmada-bot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Apr 26, 2023

chaunceyjiang reviewed Apr 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

jwcesign mentioned this pull request Apr 26, 2023

graceful-eviction does not work. #3467

Closed

chaunceyjiang reviewed Apr 26, 2023

View reviewed changes

fix generation inconsistent

9ee205f

Signed-off-by: Poor12 <shentiecheng@huawei.com>

Poor12 force-pushed the fix-generation-inconsistent branch from 3b80fe3 to 9ee205f Compare April 27, 2023 03:27

RainbowMango approved these changes Apr 27, 2023

View reviewed changes

karmada-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 27, 2023

karmada-bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Apr 27, 2023

karmada-bot merged commit 7adfdfa into karmada-io:master Apr 27, 2023
12 checks passed

Poor12 mentioned this pull request Apr 27, 2023

Automated cherry pick of #3455: fix generation inconsistent #3477

Merged

karmada-bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 27, 2023

Merge pull request #3477 from Poor12/automated-cherry-pick-of-#3455-u…

a09a584

…pstream-release-1.5 Automated cherry pick of #3455: fix generation inconsistent

XiShanYongYe-Chang mentioned this pull request Apr 28, 2023

fix: graceful-eviction still works after an unexpected restart of karmada-controller-manager #3475

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Ensure the latest schedulerObservedGeneration if do not need to schedule #3455

Ensure the latest schedulerObservedGeneration if do not need to schedule #3455

Poor12 commented Apr 23, 2023 •

edited by RainbowMango

Poor12 commented Apr 23, 2023

codecov-commenter commented Apr 23, 2023 •

edited

XiShanYongYe-Chang left a comment

XiShanYongYe-Chang commented Apr 23, 2023

Poor12 commented Apr 23, 2023

Poor12 commented Apr 24, 2023

RainbowMango left a comment

Poor12 commented Apr 25, 2023

Garrybest commented Apr 25, 2023

Garrybest commented Apr 25, 2023

Poor12 commented Apr 25, 2023

chaunceyjiang Apr 26, 2023 •

edited

Poor12 Apr 26, 2023

chaunceyjiang Apr 26, 2023

Poor12 Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang Apr 26, 2023

RainbowMango Apr 27, 2023

Poor12 Apr 27, 2023

Poor12 Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang Apr 27, 2023

RainbowMango Apr 27, 2023

RainbowMango Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang Apr 27, 2023

Poor12 commented Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang commented Apr 27, 2023

RainbowMango left a comment

karmada-bot commented Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang commented Apr 27, 2023 •

edited

	func (d *ResourceDetector) OnAdd(obj interface{}) {
	runtimeObj, ok := obj.(runtime.Object)
	if !ok {
	return
	}
	d.Processor.Enqueue(runtimeObj)
	}

	// OnUpdate handles object update event and push the object to queue.
	func (d *ResourceDetector) OnUpdate(oldObj, newObj interface{}) {
	unstructuredOldObj, err := helper.ToUnstructured(oldObj)
	if err != nil {
	klog.Errorf("Failed to transform oldObj, error: %v", err)
	return
	}

	unstructuredNewObj, err := helper.ToUnstructured(newObj)
	if err != nil {
	klog.Errorf("Failed to transform newObj, error: %v", err)
	return
	}

	if !SpecificationChanged(unstructuredOldObj, unstructuredNewObj) {
	klog.V(4).Infof("Ignore update event of object (kind=%s, %s/%s) as specification no change", unstructuredOldObj.GetKind(), unstructuredOldObj.GetNamespace(), unstructuredOldObj.GetName())
	return
	}

	d.OnAdd(newObj)
	}

Ensure the latest schedulerObservedGeneration if do not need to schedule #3455

Ensure the latest schedulerObservedGeneration if do not need to schedule #3455

Conversation

Poor12 commented Apr 23, 2023 • edited by RainbowMango

Poor12 commented Apr 23, 2023

codecov-commenter commented Apr 23, 2023 • edited

Codecov Report

XiShanYongYe-Chang left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

XiShanYongYe-Chang commented Apr 23, 2023

Poor12 commented Apr 23, 2023

Poor12 commented Apr 24, 2023

RainbowMango left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Poor12 commented Apr 25, 2023

Garrybest commented Apr 25, 2023

Garrybest commented Apr 25, 2023

Poor12 commented Apr 25, 2023

chaunceyjiang Apr 26, 2023 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Poor12 commented Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang commented Apr 27, 2023

RainbowMango left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

karmada-bot commented Apr 27, 2023

chaunceyjiang commented Apr 27, 2023 • edited

Poor12 commented Apr 23, 2023 •

edited by RainbowMango

codecov-commenter commented Apr 23, 2023 •

edited

chaunceyjiang Apr 26, 2023 •

edited

chaunceyjiang commented Apr 27, 2023 •

edited