Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.
Sign upContainerized kubelet is no longer experimental #57034
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
size/XS
do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed
cncf-cla: yes
labels
Dec 11, 2017
ingvagabund
requested review from
dixudx,
mtaufen and
xiangpengzhao
and removed request for
dixudx
Dec 11, 2017
k8s-merge-robot
assigned
vishh and
feiskyer
Dec 11, 2017
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
/retest |
k8s-ci-robot
assigned
dixudx
Dec 11, 2017
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
label
Dec 11, 2017
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@dchen1107 Is containerized kubelet stable enough for production? |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
sig/node
label
Dec 12, 2017
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@ingvagabund does this mean there are no longer any issues remaining with running kubelet as a container ? |
| @@ -333,7 +333,7 @@ func (f *KubeletFlags) AddFlags(fs *pflag.FlagSet) { | ||
| // EXPERIMENTAL FLAGS | ||
| fs.StringVar(&f.ExperimentalMounterPath, "experimental-mounter-path", f.ExperimentalMounterPath, "[Experimental] Path of mounter binary. Leave empty to use the default mount.") | ||
| fs.StringSliceVar(&f.AllowedUnsafeSysctls, "experimental-allowed-unsafe-sysctls", f.AllowedUnsafeSysctls, "Comma-separated whitelist of unsafe sysctls or unsafe sysctl patterns (ending in *). Use these at your own risk.") | ||
| fs.BoolVar(&f.Containerized, "containerized", f.Containerized, "Experimental support for running kubelet in a container. Intended for testing.") | ||
| fs.BoolVar(&f.Containerized, "containerized", f.Containerized, "Running kubelet in a container.") |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
yujuhong
assigned
dchen1107
Dec 18, 2017
feiskyer
removed their assignment
Jan 4, 2018
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@ingvagabund can you address @mtaufen nit above (move from experimental flags section in the code)? @dchen1107 @vishh can we get feedback on this? Thanks! |
k8s-merge-robot
removed
the
lgtm
label
Jan 8, 2018
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
@krmayankk we have been running containerized nodes in OpenShift successfully for quite some time. Though, it does not mean all issues are gone or none will pop up. We run conformance tests over containerized Kubelet [1] as well to see how it does. [1] https://k8s-testgrid.appspot.com/sig-node-kubelet#kubelet-containerized-conformance-aws-e2e-rhel |
ingvagabund
added
the
lgtm
label
Jan 8, 2018
ingvagabund
changed the title from
WIP: Containerized kubelet is no longer experimental
to
Containerized kubelet is no longer experimental
Jan 8, 2018
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note-none
and removed
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed
labels
Jan 8, 2018
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
@dchen1107 - per our discussion, we have integrated containerized e2e runs with test-grid and demonstrated no issue running kubelet in a container. this will give us a clear test signal moving forward. /approve no-issue |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: derekwaynecarr, dixudx, ingvagabund Associated issue requirement bypassed by: derekwaynecarr The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:
You can indicate your approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
label
Jan 8, 2018
derekwaynecarr
self-assigned this
Jan 8, 2018
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
/test all [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge] |
This comment has been minimized.
This comment has been minimized.
|
Automatic merge from submit-queue. If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions here. |
ingvagabund commentedDec 11, 2017
•
edited by derekwaynecarr
Blocked by #56250
Given the node e2e Conformance tests over containerized
Kubeletare already running and are published at https://k8s-testgrid.appspot.com/sig-node-kubelet#kubelet-containerized-conformance-aws-e2e-rhel, we can remove all mentions of the "experimental" keyword.Are there any other place where the "containerized Kubelet" is mentioned as experimental?