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

Preemption based on resource flavor order #582

Closed
3 tasks done
Tracked by #974
ahg-g opened this issue Feb 17, 2023 · 8 comments · Fixed by #810 or #849
Closed
3 tasks done
Tracked by #974

Preemption based on resource flavor order #582

ahg-g opened this issue Feb 17, 2023 · 8 comments · Fixed by #810 or #849
Assignees
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.

Comments

@ahg-g
Copy link
Contributor

ahg-g commented Feb 17, 2023

What would you like to be added:

The order of ResourceFlavors within a ClusterQueue represents preference of consumption.

Consider the case where a CQ has two RFs, standard then spot; and consider a group of low priority jobs coming in first consuming all standard quota, then a higher priority job is submitted; although the high priority job could start using the spot quota, I would like it to preempt the lower priority jobs so it can consume resources from the preferred RF (standard).

A similar scenario happens with borrowing: if CQ2 is borrowing resources from CQ1 from higher order RF, I want new jobs submitted to CQ1 to reclaim borrowed resources to fit in the preferred RF.

This behavior can be added as a knob on the CQ.

Why is this needed:

Allows setting up CQs in way that ensures stronger guarantees on their nominal quota.

Completion requirements:

This enhancement requires the following artifacts:

  • Design doc
  • API change
  • Docs update

The artifacts should be linked in subsequent comments.

@ahg-g ahg-g added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Feb 17, 2023
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Contributor

Related to #312

@KunWuLuan
Copy link
Contributor

/assign

@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

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

This bot triages un-triaged issues 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 as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue 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 Jul 19, 2023
@KunWuLuan
Copy link
Contributor

/remove-lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jul 19, 2023
@alculquicondor
Copy link
Contributor

/reopen
Implementation is still under review.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot reopened this Sep 8, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@alculquicondor: Reopened this issue.

In response to this:

/reopen
Implementation is still under review.

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.

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Contributor

@KunWuLuan can you work on the documentation for this feature?

@KunWuLuan
Copy link
Contributor

sure

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.
Projects
None yet
5 participants