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

Confusion about the "resync" of informers #843

Closed
dingjiefeng opened this issue Aug 9, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed

Confusion about the "resync" of informers #843

dingjiefeng opened this issue Aug 9, 2020 · 4 comments
Labels
lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed.

Comments

@dingjiefeng
Copy link

dingjiefeng commented Aug 9, 2020

The work process of infomers that i figured out :

  1. List all the resources according to the options given at first, and then initialize the indexer (local cache)
  2. A Watch Loop watch the events of ADD,UPDATE,DELETE , put (obj, event) into delta_fifo
  3. Pop the (obj, event) from delta_fifo, sync the indexer(local cache) by the event,, and distribute event to listeners which is interested in the events of these resources.

But i see the delta type: sync;
when doing sync(or called resync method) operation, the delta fifo gets all objects from indexer(local cache), and then re put them into delat fifo(if the obj is not in the fifo currently) and then trigger an update event to listeners.
If there is a risk that the client will lost some events, why not just sync them from api server? because i think the data source of indexer (local cache) is just from the delta fifo, whatwill we benefit from the periodic resync method?

This problem has bothered me for a long time.

@fejta-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 7, 2020
@fejta-bot
Copy link

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle rotten

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Dec 7, 2020
@fejta-bot
Copy link

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.
Reopen the issue with /reopen.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/close

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@fejta-bot: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.
Reopen the issue with /reopen.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/close

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants