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.

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

kube-controller-manager: add option for concurrent-job-syncs #85815

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
from

Conversation

@millerick
Copy link

millerick commented Dec 2, 2019

What type of PR is this?
/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:
There are --concurrent-[resource]-sync options for most other resource types. This addresses that gap.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #80397

Special notes for your reviewer:
It is not clear from documentation how to resolve this issue:
image

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Adds `--concurrent-job-syncs` as an option for the kube-controller-manager

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:


@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Dec 2, 2019

Thanks for your pull request. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please follow instructions at https://git.k8s.io/community/CLA.md#the-contributor-license-agreement to sign the CLA.

It may take a couple minutes for the CLA signature to be fully registered; after that, please reply here with a new comment and we'll verify. Thanks.


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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Dec 2, 2019

Hi @millerick. 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

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Dec 2, 2019

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: millerick
To complete the pull request process, please assign deads2k
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @deads2k in a comment when ready.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found 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

@millerick

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

millerick commented Dec 2, 2019

/add-sig api-machinery

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested review from mml and quinton-hoole Dec 2, 2019
@millerick millerick force-pushed the millerick:mmillerick/jobSyncs branch from 6c39920 to a086091 Dec 2, 2019
@tanjunchen

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

tanjunchen commented Dec 3, 2019

/ok-to-test

@millerick millerick force-pushed the millerick:mmillerick/jobSyncs branch from a086091 to b36e94b Dec 3, 2019
@millerick

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

millerick commented Dec 3, 2019

/assign @deads2k

@fedebongio

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

fedebongio commented Dec 3, 2019

/remove-sig api-machinery
/sig apps

@millerick

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Author

millerick commented Dec 3, 2019

@fedebongio , does this need to be reassigned with the SIG change? The original PR for this (#85538) before I accidentally foobar'd the branch and couldn't recover it had been assigned to sig api-machinery.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
5 participants
You can’t perform that action at this time.