Skip to content
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

Use TemplateNodeInfo in scale up #71

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 16, 2017
Merged

Conversation

mwielgus
Copy link
Contributor

ref: #43

@mwielgus mwielgus added this to the CA-0.6 milestone May 15, 2017
@mwielgus mwielgus requested a review from MaciekPytel May 15, 2017 21:48
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label May 15, 2017
baseNodeInfo, err := nodeGroup.TemplateNodeInfo()
if err != nil && err != cloudprovider.ErrNotImplemented {
return map[string]*schedulercache.NodeInfo{}, err
}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

if err == cloudprovider.ErrNotImplemented { 
    continue 
}

?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Actually can we also log before continue?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

result := make(map[string]*schedulercache.NodeInfo)
for _, node := range nodes {

// Broken nodes might have some stuff missing. Skipping.
if !kube_util.IsNodeReadyAndSchedulable(node) {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see the point of this, but I think it has a pretty big impact. In particular I'm worried about a scenario where the only node in node group becomes unready and TemplateNodeInfo is not implemented. Wouldn't that basically be non-recoverable with this change?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Removing. Next PR.

@MaciekPytel
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 16, 2017
@mwielgus mwielgus merged commit e0f9de7 into kubernetes:master May 16, 2017
yaroslava-serdiuk pushed a commit to yaroslava-serdiuk/autoscaler that referenced this pull request Feb 22, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/cluster-autoscaler cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants