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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Headlless service and pod discovery #7565

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 28, 2018
Merged

Headlless service and pod discovery #7565

merged 1 commit into from Mar 28, 2018

Conversation

gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor

For https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1293988

We need to add information about how a "developer" from with in a pod can / should collect information from the Kubernetties or OpenShift API's (events) to be notified or see what "peers" (pods) it has.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 5, 2018
@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hello @danwinship @pravisankar @mrobson @knobunc

I need help in documenting the required process here. Can you provide me with details on this, or please point me to someone who can?

Thanks for you help!

@openshift-bot openshift-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 17, 2018
@openshift-bot openshift-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Mar 13, 2018
@gaurav-nelson gaurav-nelson force-pushed the bug1293988-fixes branch 2 times, most recently from 1f9a5ed to a9915a3 Compare March 14, 2018 02:55
@gaurav-nelson gaurav-nelson changed the title [WIP] pod clustering Headlless service and pod discovery Mar 14, 2018
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Mar 14, 2018
@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

@bparees PTAL

bparees
bparees reviewed Mar 14, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@bparees bparees left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

couple nits, otherwise lgtm.

architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you @bparees fixed those.

@rcernich
Copy link

You might want to mention using the service.alpha.kubernetes.io/tolerate-unready-endpoints annotation for applications that join clusters as part of their initialization.

@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

gaurav-nelson commented Mar 16, 2018 •
edited

Thanks @rcernich

According to https://access.redhat.com/solutions/3257611 this was alpha and it is replaced by PublishNotReadyAddresses https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/release-1.8/pkg/api/types.go#L2937-L2947

Should we mention that instead? or both?

@rcernich
Copy link

I think @bparees would be a better person to ask.

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Mar 16, 2018

Should we mention that instead? or both?

instead.

@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

gaurav-nelson commented Mar 20, 2018 •
edited

@openshift/team-documentation PTAL 🚥

@gaurav-nelson gaurav-nelson added this to the Next Release milestone Mar 20, 2018
kalexand-rh
kalexand-rh reviewed Mar 21, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@kalexand-rh kalexand-rh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi Gaurav! I have some picky suggestions.

architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
architecture/core_concepts/pods_and_services.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@kalexand-rh kalexand-rh added peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR and removed peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR labels Mar 21, 2018
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 22, 2018
@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @kalexand-rh I fixed those in my latest commit.

@kalexand-rh
Copy link
Contributor

Great! Thanks, @gaurav-nelson!

@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

@lihongan PTAL

@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thanks @lihongan I have updated the command to oc get pods -o wide as suggested.

@lihongan
Copy link

LGTM, thank you @gaurav-nelson

@gaurav-nelson gaurav-nelson merged commit 59997fe into openshift:master Mar 28, 2018
@gaurav-nelson gaurav-nelson deleted the bug1293988-fixes branch March 28, 2018 22:33
@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cherrypick enterprise-3.6

@openshift-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2018
Merged
@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@gaurav-nelson: new pull request created: #8514

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-3.6

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.

@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cherrypick enterprise-3.7

@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@gaurav-nelson: new pull request created: #8515

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-3.7

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.

@openshift-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2018
Merged
@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cherrypick enterprise-3.9

@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@gaurav-nelson: new pull request created: #8516

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-3.9

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.

@openshift-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2018
Merged
@gaurav-nelson
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cherrypick enterprise-3.10

@openshift-cherrypick-robot openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2018
Merged
@openshift-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@gaurav-nelson: new pull request created: #8517

In response to this:

/cherrypick enterprise-3.10

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@bparees bparees bparees left review comments

@lihongan lihongan lihongan left review comments

@kalexand-rh kalexand-rh kalexand-rh left review comments

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
branch/enterprise-3.6 branch/enterprise-3.7 branch/enterprise-3.9 branch/enterprise-3.10 peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Next Release
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
8 participants
@gaurav-nelson @rcernich @bparees @kalexand-rh @lihongan @openshift-cherrypick-robot @openshift-bot @openshift-ci-robot