-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 237
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
[WIP]feat: Add UserAnnotedExpiration as a new disruption method #845
[WIP]feat: Add UserAnnotedExpiration as a new disruption method #845
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: tasdikrahman 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 |
Welcome @tasdikrahman! |
Hi @tasdikrahman. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the 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. |
Hey @tasdikrahman, as I recall, we wanted to start off with a small design before continuing with this. Was there anyone you had talked to about this while I was on vacation? If not, let's see if we can sync up and get a design in this PR. This should help align us on naming and making sure we're considering how this impacts any other controllers in the project. I added the needs-design label that we can remove once we add the design into the PR. |
@@ -0,0 +1,74 @@ | |||
/* |
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.
I'm anticipating that we probably don't want to do something as verbose as karpenter.sh/voluntarily-disrupted=drifted
. Realistically, it should probably something simple like karpenter.sh/disrupt=true
since we've already got an annotation that's karpenter.sh/do-not-disrupt=false
I wonder if it would be better to start off with a quick design doc for RFC? This is adding a new controller and method of disruption. I am not fully sure how this fits in with other methods |
Hey folks, sorry for the delay, I will work on sharing a design doc first on this and share it here to align on the approach and changes. I opened the PR as a wip. @njtran @garvinp-stripe @jonathan-innis |
Thanks. @tasdikrahman I'll set this as a Draft in the meantime. |
Hey @tasdikrahman how are you doing? Happy to keep you assigned if you want, but want to make sure that you're making progress. I want to make sure the issue is tracked properly based on if you're getting progress here. |
/assign @njtran |
/assign @jigisha620 |
@jonathan-innis: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: jigisha620. Note that only kubernetes-sigs members with read permissions, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time. 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. |
/assign @jigisha620 |
@tasdikrahman hey, it seems like it's been a while since you've been able to work on this. I'll close this out and unassign you from the issue so someone else can take it up if they want, but feel free to take it up when you have more time. |
Fixes #688
This PR introduces a custom disruption method which is evaluating candidates which need to be deprovisioned, which have been added an annotation
to the Node object.
How was this change tested?
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.