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
Bug 1965562: recycler-for-nfs-... does not set requests or priorityClassName #538
Conversation
@dobsonj: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1965562, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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 think |
/bugzilla refresh |
@dobsonj: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1965562, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
No GitHub users were found matching the public email listed for the QA contact in Bugzilla (wduan@redhat.com), skipping review request. In response to this:
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 @wking could you take a look? |
/assign @soltysh |
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.
Thank you for the PR @dobsonj . The choice is always up to the developer. If you think it is ok for the recycler pod to be preempted and be killed, I am fine with it.
/lgtm
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
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: bertinatto, dobsonj, ravisantoshgudimetla, soltysh, wking 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 |
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
1 similar comment
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
/retest |
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
/retest |
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
@dobsonj: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Bugzilla bug 1965562 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
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. |
See the bug for details:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1965562
openshift-user-critical
seems ok to me, and the request sizes are the same as what we use on some of the CSI sidecars:https://github.com/openshift/aws-ebs-csi-driver-operator/blob/master/assets/controller.yaml#L284-L287
This container is very ephemeral (as in, typically can't catch it running without adding a sleep). It just removes files from an NFS volume after it's deleted, when
persistentVolumeReclaimPolicy: Recycle
is set on the PV.@openshift/storage @wking : any other thoughts or feedback on the requests or priority class?