-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 38.7k
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
nodeaffinity: scheduler queueing hints #119155
Conversation
This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the The 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. |
@carlory Please |
/assign @sanposhiho |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
initial review.
6e33509
to
222f0b4
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Left one last nit, otherwise LGTM.
/lgtm
@kubernetes/sig-scheduling-approvers Please someone give a final review for /approve
(I'm assigned to this PR as both reviewer/approver)
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: a91cd1a34a2b04e548be2bae830463ec10a23ad9
|
0dbc205
to
0013118
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One thing slipped.
Co-authored-by: Kensei Nakada <handbomusic@gmail.com>
0013118
to
1d88bf9
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: bf2f2c4cae9a85fb79f8e767ad4c146fc21c2192
|
Hi @alculquicondor can you take a look? |
@kubernetes/sig-scheduling-approvers Please someone give a final review for /approve |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/approve
return framework.QueueAfterBackoff | ||
} | ||
|
||
requiredNodeAffinity := nodeaffinity.GetRequiredNodeAffinity(pod) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with @sanposhiho. We are already parsing node affinity for the static checks, so we know this scales just fine.
But we need to remove those static checks, otherwise we are doing it twice per pod.
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: alculquicondor, carlory 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 |
/release-note-edit
|
/retest |
/retest |
/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce |
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Part of #118893
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: