-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40.3k
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
Fix a bug where managedFields was not trimmed in scheduler #131016
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
This issue is currently awaiting triage. If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the The 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-sigs/prow repository. |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: likakuli 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 |
kubernetes/staging/src/k8s.io/code-generator/cmd/informer-gen/generators/factory.go Lines 127 to 134 in bdda0a5
kubernetes/staging/src/k8s.io/code-generator/cmd/informer-gen/generators/factory.go Lines 152 to 158 in bdda0a5
The handling is different even though both are informer-level parameters. The current way of setting transform makes it very easy to write problematic code. |
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
/kind regression
What this PR does / why we need it:
The PR #119556 was introduced to improve the memory usage of kube-scheduler by dropping the .metadata.managedFields field, which kube-scheduler does not require. However, after this commit c86f562, the pod informer's transform function is reset to the informerFactory's transform, which is nil. As a result, the previous optimization is no longer effective.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: