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

Follow-up selfhosting improvements #127

Closed
2 of 4 tasks
luxas opened this issue Jan 20, 2017 · 13 comments · Fixed by kubernetes/kubernetes#47435
Closed
2 of 4 tasks

Follow-up selfhosting improvements #127

luxas opened this issue Jan 20, 2017 · 13 comments · Fixed by kubernetes/kubernetes#47435
Labels
kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release.
Milestone
v1.9

Comments

@luxas
Copy link
Member

luxas commented Jan 20, 2017 •
edited by timothysc
Loading

kubernetes/kubernetes#40075 is now lgtm'd and we don't want to put more complexity in the PR, it's big enough already and has been waiting for quite a long time.

It now works, and that's great.

OLD: Here we should track the fixup work (20th Jan):

EDIT: New list as of 19th June

@pires @mikedanese @Kargakis @lukemarsden
@luxas luxas mentioned this issue Jan 20, 2017
Merged
@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Jan 20, 2017

cc @aaronlevy @philips

@pires
Copy link
Contributor

pires commented Jan 21, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Use the more generic --controlplane or --controlplane-type flag

I strongly disagree with this one. There are only two types of deployments right now, self-hosted or non-self-hosted. And I don't see that changing in the future. --self-hosted is clear about its intents.

@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Jan 23, 2017

I strongly disagree with this one. There are only two types of deployments right now, self-hosted or non-self-hosted. And I don't see that changing in the future. --self-hosted is clear about its intents.

I see it from the perspective that we don't know what happens in the future; we should be future-proof and I also assume here that we will enable self-hosting by default. So if we have self-hosting enabled by default, --self-hosted=false feels like an awkward way of using static pods for those who prefer that.
WDYT @pires?

Also forgot to add to the list:

  • Push a version of the Pod Checkpointer to a gcr.io repo from kubernetes/kubeadm and deploy it in self-hosted mode

@pires pires mentioned this issue Jan 23, 2017
Closed
@pires
Copy link
Contributor

pires commented Jan 23, 2017

For now, --self-hosted seems to suffice for people wanting to try self-hosted mode, which is still a rough take, and I'm expecting feedback, like this PR, to shape future changes. So, renaming flags doesn't make much sense to me here. I think we must come up with API objects that cover the features we're planning for ASAP.

@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Jan 23, 2017

I think we must come up with API objects that cover the features we're planning for ASAP.

That's exactly what I'm doing

@dgoodwin
Copy link

Do we still need checkpointing, server restart and disaster recovery?

pires added a commit to apprenda/kubernetes that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2017
@pires
kubeadm: set maxUnavailable and maxSurge for self-hosted component de…
ab1a5b5 
…ployments.

Refs kubernetes/kubeadm#127
@pires pires mentioned this issue Feb 1, 2017
Merged
k8s-github-robot pushed a commit to kubernetes/kubernetes that referenced this issue Feb 1, 2017
Merge pull request #40797 from apprenda/kubeadm_selfhosted_rollingupd…
fe36648 
…ate_params

Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 40801, 40797)

kubeadm: set maxUnavailable and maxSurge for self-hosted component deployments

**What this PR does / why we need it**: This PR explicitly specifies `kubeadm` self-hosted components deployment update strategy (`RollingUpdateDeploymentStrategyType`) and its parameters (`maxUnavailable` and `maxSurge`).

**Which issue this PR fixes**:
Refs #40075 (comment)
Refs kubernetes/kubeadm#127

**Special notes for your reviewer**: /cc @Kargakis @luxas 

**Release note**:
```release-note
NONE
```
@luxas luxas added this to the v1.6 milestone Feb 9, 2017
@aaronlevy aaronlevy mentioned this issue Feb 14, 2017
Closed
@luxas luxas removed this from the v1.6 milestone Mar 2, 2017
@luxas luxas added kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. kind/enhancement priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. labels May 29, 2017
@luxas luxas added this to the v1.8 milestone May 29, 2017
@lewismarshall lewismarshall mentioned this issue Jun 12, 2017
Open
2 tasks
@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Jun 19, 2017 •
edited
Loading

EDIT: New list as of 19th June

cc @roberthbailey @timothysc @aaronlevy @roberthbailey Did I miss something ^?

@luxas luxas mentioned this issue Jul 4, 2017
Merged
@timothysc
Copy link
Member

Why is this closed...? Those last two items still need to be done.

@timothysc timothysc reopened this Jul 17, 2017
@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Jul 17, 2017

No idea @timothysc, Github links ftw I guess?

@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Aug 19, 2017 •
edited
Loading

@timothysc requested an update on this issue, here we go:

Sounds good?

@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Aug 19, 2017

cc @diegs for the "Add-then-kill" DaemonSet UpdateStrategy implementation, please link here when you have the PR up

@luxas luxas mentioned this issue Aug 19, 2017
Closed
@luxas luxas mentioned this issue Sep 4, 2017
Closed
@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Sep 6, 2017

@timothysc @diegs Moving the rest of these items to v1.9

@luxas luxas modified the milestones: v1.9, v1.8 Sep 6, 2017
@luxas
Copy link
Member Author

luxas commented Nov 9, 2017

The add-then-kill feature is not relevant anymore and the checkpointing issue is separate (#131) so closing this as it doesn't have any action items

@luxas luxas closed this as completed Nov 9, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.9
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

kubeadm: Make self-hosting work and split it out to a phase luxas/kubernetes
4 participants
@dgoodwin @timothysc @pires @luxas