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.

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

Use pod-template-hash label in addition to topology spread constraint matchLabels #917

Closed
jklaw90 opened this issue Aug 17, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed.

Comments

@jklaw90
Copy link
Contributor

jklaw90 commented Aug 17, 2022

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.

Multiple deployments can exist with the same topology spread constraint match labels. This means that our topology spread constraint strategy may group multiple deployments and consider them as one.

Describe the solution you'd like

We should use the pod-template-hash ensure unique deployments are calculated separately.

Describe alternatives you've considered

None

What version of descheduler are you using?

descheduler version:
1.24

Additional context

@jklaw90 jklaw90 added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Aug 17, 2022
@a7i
Copy link
Contributor

a7i commented Aug 18, 2022

Adding our discussion here as well for reference.

Given that kubernetes/kubernetes#111441 has been merged, Descheduler could use the new MatchLabelKeys field similar to how Scheduler is using it today.

cc: @damemi for insights, given he created the Scheduler issue.

@jklaw90
Copy link
Contributor Author

jklaw90 commented Aug 18, 2022

I saw the pr after i logged this issue. I agree i didn't realize only the deployment controller was using the pod hash. I can change the scope of the issue or close it out.

@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Mark this issue or PR as rotten with /lifecycle rotten
  • Close this issue or PR with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 16, 2022
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
  • Close this issue or PR with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Dec 16, 2022
@jklaw90 jklaw90 closed this as completed Dec 18, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants