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

Pod Overhead: account resources tied to the pod sandbox, but not specific containers #688

Closed
tallclair opened this issue Jan 14, 2019 · 88 comments
Assignees
Labels
lifecycle/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness. priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. stage/stable Denotes an issue tracking an enhancement targeted for Stable/GA status
Milestone

Comments

@tallclair
Copy link
Member

tallclair commented Jan 14, 2019

Enhancement Description

Relevant K/K issues/PRs for code-freeze::
e2e tests: kubernetes/kubernetes#87215
monitoring: kubernetes/kubernetes#87259
Relevant K/E issues: #1526

Please to keep this description up to date. This will help the Enhancement Team track efficiently the evolution of the enhancement

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. label Jan 14, 2019
@tallclair
Copy link
Member Author

tallclair commented Jan 14, 2019

/help
I'm looking for someone who is interested in picking back up this proposal. Specifically, the design proposal needs to be reworked in the context of RuntimeClass, and the details need to be worked through with the sig-node community before we can move to implementation.

/cc @egernst

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. label Jan 14, 2019
@tallclair tallclair added the priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. label Jan 15, 2019
@egernst
Copy link

egernst commented Jan 15, 2019

Thanks @tallclair. I may have questions on the process, but am happy to pick this up.

@tallclair
Copy link
Member Author

tallclair commented Jan 15, 2019

\o/
/remove-help
/assign @egernst

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. label Jan 15, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Jan 15, 2019

@tallclair: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: egernst.

Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can be assigned and that issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time.
For more information please see the contributor guide

In response to this:

\o/
/remove-help
/assign @egernst

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.

@tallclair
Copy link
Member Author

tallclair commented Jan 17, 2019

/assign @egernst

@egernst
Copy link

egernst commented Feb 15, 2019

Hey @tallclair et al, I made several suggestions for the WIP RFC @ https://docs.google.com/document/d/1EJKT4gyl58-kzt2bnwkv08MIUZ6lkDpXcxkHqCvvAp4/edit?usp=sharing

I added a section for updating the runtimeClass CRD, and explained how the values would be obtained from the new suggested runtimeClass fields rather than configured in the runtimeController. The suggested runtimeController scope is also greatly reduced, allowing this first iteration to just handle adding the pod overhead.

PTAL.

@vinaykul
Copy link
Contributor

vinaykul commented Mar 26, 2019

@tallclair @egernst I quickly went though the design proposal. We are working on In-Place Vertical Scaling for Pods, and I want to clarify a couple of things.

In the context or in-place resize, do you see PodSpec.Overhead as something VPA should be aware of via metrics reporting? And perhaps in the future, track this field and make recommendations for it. It would be a good idea to nail down early-on if this field should be mutable by an external entity.

CC: @kgolab @bskiba @schylek

@kacole2
Copy link
Member

kacole2 commented Apr 12, 2019

Hello @tallclair, I'm the Enhancement Lead for 1.15. It looks like there is no KEP accepted yet. Is it safe to assume this will not make the enhancement freeze deadline for 1.15?

egernst pushed a commit to egernst/enhancements that referenced this issue Apr 12, 2019
Updates to pod-overhead based in review discussion:
 - Clarify what Overhead is in the pod spec, and behavior when
 this is manually defined without a runtimeClass.
 - Clarify ResourceQuota changes necessary
 - Add in CRI API change to make pod details available
 - Define feature gate
 - Update runtimeClass definition

Fixes: kubernetes#688

Signed-off-by: Eric Ernst <eric.ernst@intel.com>
@tallclair
Copy link
Member Author

tallclair commented Apr 12, 2019

We're still planning on getting this into 1.15. Don't we still have close to 3 weeks to get the KEP in? KEP is here, btw: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-node/20190226-pod-overhead.md

@tallclair tallclair added priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. and removed priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. labels Apr 12, 2019
@tallclair tallclair added this to the v1.15 milestone Apr 12, 2019
@tallclair tallclair added the stage/alpha Denotes an issue tracking an enhancement targeted for Alpha status label Apr 12, 2019
@tallclair tallclair mentioned this issue Apr 12, 2019
@kacole2 kacole2 added tracked/no Denotes an enhancement issue is NOT actively being tracked by the Release Team tracked/yes Denotes an enhancement issue is actively being tracked by the Release Team and removed tracked/no Denotes an enhancement issue is NOT actively being tracked by the Release Team labels Apr 12, 2019
egernst pushed a commit to egernst/enhancements that referenced this issue Apr 16, 2019
Updates to pod-overhead based in review discussion:
 - Clarify what Overhead is in the pod spec, and behavior when
 this is manually defined without a runtimeClass.
 - Clarify ResourceQuota changes necessary
 - Add in CRI API change to make pod details available
 - Define feature gate
 - Update runtimeClass definition

Fixes: kubernetes#688

Signed-off-by: Eric Ernst <eric.ernst@intel.com>
egernst pushed a commit to egernst/enhancements that referenced this issue Apr 18, 2019
Updates to pod-overhead based in review discussion:
 - Clarify what Overhead is in the pod spec, and behavior when
 this is manually defined without a runtimeClass.
 - Clarify ResourceQuota changes necessary
 - Add in CRI API change to make pod details available
 - Define feature gate
 - Update runtimeClass definition

Fixes: kubernetes#688

Signed-off-by: Eric Ernst <eric.ernst@intel.com>
egernst pushed a commit to egernst/enhancements that referenced this issue Apr 18, 2019
Updates to pod-overhead based in review discussion:
 - Clarify what Overhead is in the pod spec, and behavior when
 this is manually defined without a runtimeClass.
 - Clarify ResourceQuota changes necessary
 - Add in CRI API change to make pod details available
 - Define feature gate
 - Update runtimeClass definition

Fixes: kubernetes#688

Signed-off-by: Eric Ernst <eric.ernst@intel.com>
egernst pushed a commit to egernst/enhancements that referenced this issue Apr 18, 2019
Updates to pod-overhead based in review discussion:
 - Clarify what Overhead is in the pod spec, and behavior when
 this is manually defined without a runtimeClass.
 - Clarify ResourceQuota changes necessary
 - Add in CRI API change to make pod details available
 - Define feature gate
 - Update runtimeClass definition

Fixes: kubernetes#688

Signed-off-by: Eric Ernst <eric.ernst@intel.com>
@gracenng gracenng added the tracked/yes Denotes an enhancement issue is actively being tracked by the Release Team label Jan 16, 2022
@gracenng
Copy link
Member

gracenng commented Jan 17, 2022

Hi @egernst ! 1.24 Enhancements team here. Just checking in as we approach enhancements freeze on 18:00pm PT on Thursday Feb 3rd. This enhancements is targeting stable for 1.24, is that correct?.
Here’s where this enhancement currently stands:

  • Updated KEP file using the latest template has been merged into the k/enhancements repo.
  • KEP status is marked as implementable for this release PodOverhead to GA #3146
  • KEP has a test plan section filled out.
  • KEP has up to date graduation criteria.
  • KEP has a production readiness review that has been completed and merged into k/enhancements PodOverhead to GA #3146

The status of this enhancement is track as at risk. Please update this issue description to reflect enhancements target
Thanks!

@gracenng
Copy link
Member

gracenng commented Jan 30, 2022

Hi @egernst , 1.24 Enhancements Team here.

Reaching out as we're less than a week away from Enhancement Freeze on Thursday, February 3rd.
There's no update for this enhancement since last checkin, let me know if I missed anything.
Current status is at risk

@gracenng
Copy link
Member

gracenng commented Feb 4, 2022

All good for 1.24 Enhancements Freeze

@nate-double-u
Copy link

nate-double-u commented Feb 15, 2022

Hi @egernst 👋 1.24 Docs lead here.

This enhancement is marked as Needs Docs for the 1.24 release.

Please follow the steps detailed in the documentation to open a PR against the dev-1.24 branch in the k/website repo. This PR can be just a placeholder at this time and must be created before Thursday, March 31st, 2022 @ 18:00 PDT.

Also, if needed take a look at Documenting for a release to familiarize yourself with the docs requirement for the release.

Thanks!

@gracenng
Copy link
Member

gracenng commented Mar 15, 2022

Hi @egernst 1.24 Enhancements Team here,
With Code Freeze approaching on 18:00 PDT Tuesday March 29th 2022, we are currently tracking the following k/k PR:

The status of this enhancement is at risk until the PRs are merged. Please let me know if I'm missing any. Thanks!

@valaparthvi
Copy link

valaparthvi commented Mar 21, 2022

Hi @SergeyKanzhelev @egernst 👋 1.24 Release Comms team here.

We have an opt-in process for the feature blog delivery. If you would like to publish a feature blog for this issue in this cycle, then please opt in on this tracking sheet.

The deadline for submissions and the feature blog freeze is scheduled for 01:00 UTC Wednesday 23rd March 2022 / 18:00 PDT Tuesday 22nd March 2022. Other important dates for delivery and review are listed here: https://github.com/kubernetes/sig-release/tree/master/releases/release-1.24#timeline.

For reference, here is the blog for 1.23.

Please feel free to reach out any time to me or on the #release-comms channel with questions or comments.

Thanks!

@gracenng
Copy link
Member

gracenng commented Mar 24, 2022

Hi @SergeyKanzhelev, is kubernetes/kubernetes#108781 code for this feature as well?
Bumping as we're less than a week from Code Freeze

@gracenng
Copy link
Member

gracenng commented Mar 29, 2022

All good for 1.24 Code Freeze 🥳

@valaparthvi
Copy link

valaparthvi commented Mar 29, 2022

Hi @SergeyKanzhelev @egernst wave 1.24 Release Comms team here.

We have an opt-in process for the feature blog delivery. If you would like to publish a feature blog for this issue in this cycle, then please opt in on this tracking sheet.

The deadline for submissions and the feature blog freeze is scheduled for 01:00 UTC Wednesday 23rd March 2022 / 18:00 PDT Tuesday 22nd March 2022. Other important dates for delivery and review are listed here: https://github.com/kubernetes/sig-release/tree/master/releases/release-1.24#timeline.

For reference, here is the blog for 1.23.

Please feel free to reach out any time to me or on the #release-comms channel with questions or comments.

Thanks!

@SergeyKanzhelev Would you like to add this to the feature blog? I can add it on your behalf if you still do not have the permissions. If you would like to add this to the feature blog, then please add a placeholder PR as well by March 30.

Example of a feature blog PR: kubernetes/website#30538
Example of a feature blog: https://github.com/kubernetes/website/blob/main/content/en/blog/_posts/2021-12-08-dual-stack-networking-ga.md

@Priyankasaggu11929 Priyankasaggu11929 added stage/stable Denotes an issue tracking an enhancement targeted for Stable/GA status and removed stage/beta Denotes an issue tracking an enhancement targeted for Beta status tracked/yes Denotes an enhancement issue is actively being tracked by the Release Team labels May 10, 2022
@Priyankasaggu11929
Copy link
Member

Priyankasaggu11929 commented May 10, 2022

Hello @SergeyKanzhelev @egernst 👋, 1.25 Enhancements team here.

This feature has been fully implemented and is now GA in K8s version 1.24. 🎉

Please update the kep.yaml file's status to implemented and close this issue.

This would help accurate tracking in the v1.25 cycle. Thank you so much! 🙂

@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

k8s-triage-robot commented Aug 8, 2022

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Mark this issue or PR as rotten with /lifecycle rotten
  • Close this issue or PR with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/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 Aug 8, 2022
@tallclair
Copy link
Member Author

tallclair commented Aug 24, 2022

/lifecycle frozen

@SergeyKanzhelev @egernst Can we close this?

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lifecycle/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Aug 24, 2022
@SergeyKanzhelev
Copy link
Member

SergeyKanzhelev commented Sep 19, 2022

Yes, I think it can. Just two house cleaning items left, pls review if you have time:

(not sure for the process of updating website - like removing the feature gate mention here https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/pod-overhead/). But I think it should stay there for longer

/close

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Sep 19, 2022

@SergeyKanzhelev: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

Yes, I think it can. Just two house cleaning items left, pls review if you have time:

(not sure for the process of updating website - like removing the feature gate mention here https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/pod-overhead/). But I think it should stay there for longer

/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/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness. priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. stage/stable Denotes an issue tracking an enhancement targeted for Stable/GA status
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests