-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
[v9.17.0] Maestro v9 to coexist with other Game Room providers #623
base: v9.16.0
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
8f9f4a6
to
597ef9c
Compare
597ef9c
to
f2c4677
Compare
Wdyt about adding a configuration option for the namespace deletion? My concern here is that when not having other GR providers, it's good to delete te namespace. |
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.
LGTM
@@ -840,7 +837,8 @@ func UpdateSchedulerConfig( | |||
} | |||
|
|||
// MustUpdatePods returns true if it's necessary to delete old pod and create a new one | |||
// so this have the new configuration. | |||
// | |||
// so this have the new configuration. |
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.
is this intended?
When creating a scheduler, we fail if the namespace already exists. This is problematic if there are other GR providers running at the same namespace, like maestro v10 for example. Thus, don't fail scheduler creation if namespace exists.
There can be other GR providers running into the same namespace, thus we don't want to cascade delete the k8s namespace on scheduler deletion
There can be other resources/pods running in the namespace that are not managed by Maestro. In that case, we want to filter the watcher to only receive pod events from the ones created by v9