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

Validate Workload.spec.admission on webhook #328

Closed
1 of 3 tasks
alculquicondor opened this issue Aug 12, 2022 · 6 comments · Fixed by #342
Closed
1 of 3 tasks

Validate Workload.spec.admission on webhook #328

alculquicondor opened this issue Aug 12, 2022 · 6 comments · Fixed by #342
Assignees
Labels
help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.

Comments

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Contributor

What would you like to be added:

The following validations should apply:

  • The clusterQueue should be a valid object name.
  • The list of podSetFlavors should match the podSets names.
  • Each resourceName should be listed in the pod spec, although it might be too cumbersome to validate, so we could ignore it.
  • Each flavorName should be a valid object name.

Also validate that, once set, the contents of the admission are immutable, except that it can be set to nil.

Why is this needed:

To prevent accidental misuse of this field by administrators.

Completion requirements:

This enhancement requires the following artifacts:

  • Design doc
  • API change
  • Docs update

The artifacts should be linked in subsequent comments.

@alculquicondor alculquicondor added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Aug 12, 2022
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Contributor Author

/help

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@alculquicondor:
This request has been marked as needing help from a contributor.

Guidelines

Please ensure that the issue body includes answers to the following questions:

  • Why are we solving this issue?
  • To address this issue, are there any code changes? If there are code changes, what needs to be done in the code and what places can the assignee treat as reference points?
  • Does this issue have zero to low barrier of entry?
  • How can the assignee reach out to you for help?

For more details on the requirements of such an issue, please see here and ensure that they are met.

If this request no longer meets these requirements, the label can be removed
by commenting with the /remove-help command.

In response to this:

/help

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. label Aug 12, 2022
@kerthcet
Copy link
Contributor

/assign

@kerthcet
Copy link
Contributor

I wonder if we should allow parts of podsets to run first when out of resources, then we can release the resources for the left podsets to run. For podgroup pods, we should have a different set of logic.

@kerthcet
Copy link
Contributor

And this can be configured.

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Contributor Author

For now, we are going with the assumption that the entire Workload is all-or-nothing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants