📖 APIExportEndpointSlice and Partition doc #2799
Conversation
| # Partition API | ||
|
|
||
| `Partitions` and `PartitionSets` build an API that allows service providers and cluster administrators to create shard Partitions. These partitions can then be leveraged: | ||
| - for the placement of the controllers of the service providers and other components. These APIs provide the information on shard topology required for the scheduling. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This says placement although does not relate to the Placement APIs? That could cause some confusion, might be worth to reword a bit?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
changed to deployment
| path: root:wildwest:cowboys-service | ||
| name: cowboy | ||
| # optional | ||
| partition: us-west-1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| partition: us-west-1 | |
| partition: cloud-region-gcp-europe-xdfgs |
Is this by name? Could we reference one of the example above?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could one reference a PartitionSet instead?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
No, only Partitions can be referenced. PartitionSets are just a convenient way of generating Partitions. If service providers know the Shards and their labels they could create Partitions directly without using a PartitionSet.
I can change the name.
|
|
||
| A: Think of this virtual workspace as representing a wildcard listing across all workspaces. It doesn't make sense to | ||
| look at a specific namespace across all workspaces, so you have to list across all namespaces too. | ||
| A: Think of this endpoint as representing a wildcard listing across all workspaces. It doesn't make sense to look at a specific namespace across all workspaces, so you have to list across all namespaces too. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Out of curiosity, why doesn't it make sense to only look at a single namespace (or a set of) across many workspaces?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is not from me so that I can only guess. One reason may be that the natural isolation level in kcp is the workspace rather than namespace.
I only intended to remove "virtual workspace" as we want to move away from this wording that has caused confusion.
|
|
||
| Q: If I attempt to use an `APIExport` virtual workspace before there are any `APIBindings` I get the "Error from server | ||
| (NotFound): Unable to list ...: the server could not find the requested resource". Is this a bug? | ||
| Q: If I attempt to use an `APIExport` endpoint before there are any `APIBindings` I get the "Error from server (NotFound): Unable to list ...: the server could not find the requested resource". Is this a bug? | ||
|
|
||
| A: It is a bug. See <https://github.com/kcp-dev/kcp/issues/1183> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This issue was closed, is the above still valid?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes it is. The resolution was only partial, i.e. not working with shards, and not ported to the new API. The preferred approach for now would be to amend the virtual workspace so that an empty list is returned:
https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C021U8WSAFK/p1674303045697859?thread_ts=1674243613.104869&cid=C021U8WSAFK
Also add some information on PermissionClaim and change wording from 'virtual workspace' to 'service endpoint'. Signed-off-by: Frederic Giloux <fgiloux@redhat.com>
…tion Signed-off-by: Frederic Giloux <fgiloux@redhat.com>
| @@ -293,13 +355,11 @@ Yay! | |||
|
|
|||
| Q: Why is there a new `APIResourceSchema` resource type that appears to be very similar to `CustomResourceDefinition`? | |||
|
|
|||
| A: FIXME | |||
| A: An APIResourceSchema defines a single custom API type. It is almost identical to a CRD, but creating an APIResourceSchema instance does not add a usable API to the server. By intentionally decoupling the schema definition from serving, API owners can be more explicit about API evolution. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
taken from https://hackmd.io/DJGw8YdQTaiPKz9a66Z6OQ
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: ncdc 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
Summary
This PR adds some documentation for APIExportEndpointSlice, Partition and PartitionSet.
It also adds some information on PermissionClaim and changes wording from 'virtual workspace' to 'service endpoint'.
Related issue(s)
Fixes #2776