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
Remove --use-real-proxier support from kubemark #121814
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. |
/lgtm Thanks! |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: b50ee0f3805978b5018291096f7202e24f4521f6
|
kubemark's proxy mode exists to test how kube-proxy affects the load on the apiserver, not how it affects the load on the node. There's no need to generate fake iptables commands, because that all happens entirely independently of the api watchers.
34ed960
to
ae3235a
Compare
/lgtm /assign @liggitt - for vendor change |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 220fe65d078a32b40597da15a0b6e5e7ee185bd0
|
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: danwinship, liggitt, wojtek-t 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 |
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
kubemark's proxy mode exists to test how kube-proxy affects the load on the apiserver, not how it affects the load on the node. There's no need to generate fake iptables commands, because that all happens entirely independently of the api watchers.
It looks like sig-scalability's jobs turn this flag off anyway, as does the suggested template so this is just getting rid of something probably no one was using (and making kubemark slightly less dependent on undocumented internals of kube-proxy).
(I see there are comments in the kubemark source about splitting up the hollow kubelet and hollow proxy more... We could just add
--proxy-mode=hollow
to thekube-proxy
binary if you wanted...)Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
none
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
I think? kubemark is just for k8s devs, not end users, right?
/assign @wojtek-t
/sig scalability