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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Added NoSchedule effect to GetNodeConditionPredicate #792

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 12, 2019
Merged

Added NoSchedule effect to GetNodeConditionPredicate #792

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 12, 2019

Conversation

retpolanne
Copy link
Contributor

This PR fixes #595.

It searches for a taint with effect NoSchedule on GetNodeConditionPredicate. This way, the Load Balancer Sync can filter out nodes with taints such as ToBeDeletedByClusterAutoscaler.

Notice that, on Kubernetes Autoscaler, the node is only tainted, it doesn't look like the node.Spec.Unschedulable is set anywhere.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @vinicyusmacedo!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/ingress-gce 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/ingress-gce has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Jul 7, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @vinicyusmacedo. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jul 7, 2019
@rramkumar1
Copy link
Contributor

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Jul 7, 2019
freehan
freehan reviewed Jul 10, 2019
View reviewed changes
pkg/utils/utils.go
@@ -319,6 +319,13 @@ func GetNodeConditionPredicate() listers.NodeConditionPredicate {
return false
}

// Get all nodes that have a taint with NoSchedule effect
for _, taint := range node.Spec.Taints {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I feel like it should not be this generic. It should be limited to the autoscaler's ToBeDeletedByClusterAutoscaler taint.
Otherwise, if all nodes mark by no schedule by accident, it would disrupt all existing LB traffic.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sounds better, I'll change it.

freehan
freehan reviewed Jul 10, 2019
View reviewed changes
pkg/utils/utils.go Outdated
@@ -319,6 +319,13 @@ func GetNodeConditionPredicate() listers.NodeConditionPredicate {
return false
}

// Get all nodes that have a taint with NoSchedule effect
for _, taint := range node.Spec.Taints {
if taint.Key == "ToBeDeletedByClusterAutoscaler" {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am wondering if there is a repo holding this well known taints?
If it can be easily referenced in this repo, then probably reference it directly.
If not, probably worthy putting it into a const variable and add comments and links to its definition.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@freehan it is exported on the autoscaler, I can try to use it. The only problem I might have is with vendoring.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@freehan It was kind of hard to vendor it (there's one dependency which go couldn't find) so I kept it as a const.

@freehan
Copy link
Contributor

freehan commented Jul 10, 2019

/ok-to-test

freehan
freehan reviewed Jul 11, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@freehan freehan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just one nit. Otherwise LGTM

pkg/utils/utils.go
@@ -67,6 +67,8 @@ const (
// This label is feature-gated in kubernetes/kubernetes but we do not have feature gates
// This will need to be updated after the end of the alpha
LabelNodeRoleExcludeBalancer = "alpha.service-controller.kubernetes.io/exclude-balancer"
// ToBeDeletedTaint is the taint that the autoscaler adds when a node is scheduled to be deleted
ToBeDeletedTaint = "ToBeDeletedByClusterAutoscaler"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there any public documentation regarding this taint?

If not, probably still need to add a link to the autoscaler repo.
https://github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/blob/cluster-autoscaler-0.5.2/cluster-autoscaler/utils/deletetaint/delete.go#L33

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@freehan I didn't find any docs on it :/

I'll try to vendor it and its dependencies.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If there is tons of dependencies, just add the link in the comment then. No need for the hustle.

@freehan
Copy link
Contributor

freehan commented Jul 12, 2019

Sorry for nit picking. Would you mind squash the commits?

I will lgtm it afterwards. Thanks!!

@retpolanne
Copy link
Contributor Author

@freehan not a problem. There ya go!

@freehan
Copy link
Contributor

freehan commented Jul 12, 2019

/lgtm
/approve

Thanks!

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 12, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: freehan, vinicyusmacedo

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 12, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 67d5ffd into kubernetes:master Jul 12, 2019
@retpolanne retpolanne deleted the autoscaler-react branch July 13, 2019 13:30
@atulaggarwal atulaggarwal mentioned this pull request Nov 4, 2020
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@freehan freehan freehan left review comments

@MrHohn MrHohn Awaiting requested review from MrHohn

@rramkumar1 rramkumar1 Awaiting requested review from rramkumar1

Assignees

@freehan freehan

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. 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. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Ingress controller should react to node scale down event from autoscaler
4 participants
@retpolanne @k8s-ci-robot @rramkumar1 @freehan