Multi-tenant Elastic Resource Quota #48

[kaiohenricunha]

Area

• Scheduler
• Controller
• Helm Chart
• Documents

Other components

No response

What happened?

The current design of the capacity scheduler for elastic quotas doesn't fit a multi-tenant scenario, if I understand it correctly.

If I have the following namespaces:

acme-dev-us-west-2-webhook
acme-dev-us-west-2-kube-janitor
apple-dev-us-west-2-webhook

It would be great if we could configure the "acme" tenant resources to be shared only among namespaces starting with "acme".

What did you expect to happen?

Tenant's resources not shared with other tenants

How can we reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible)?

No response

Anything else we need to know?

No response

Kubernetes version

1.28

Scheduler Plugins version

Latest

[Huang-Wei]

My 2 cents is that there is no one-size-fit-all quota design. If an ElasticQuota needs to support cross-namespace sharing, there are more areas need to be considered:

• semantics of selector (label selector or regex or mix, etc.)
• how to deal with overlapping selectors
• how it impacts preemption
• ...

If you have a through design and can make it backwards-compatible, I'm happy to review to discuss the next steps.

[kaiohenricunha]

My 2 cents is that there is no one-size-fit-all quota design. If an ElasticQuota needs to support cross-namespace sharing, there are more areas need to be considered:

• semantics of selector (label selector or regex or mix, etc.)

• how to deal with overlapping selectors

• how it impacts preemption

• ...

If you have a through design and can make it backwards-compatible, I'm happy to review to discuss the next steps.

Thanks for the ideas. I'll see if I can work on that and submit a PR. Could be an interesting use case.

[imliuda]

My 2 cents is that there is no one-size-fit-all quota design. If an ElasticQuota needs to support cross-namespace sharing, there are more areas need to be considered:

• semantics of selector (label selector or regex or mix, etc.)
• how to deal with overlapping selectors
• how it impacts preemption
• ...

If you have a through design and can make it backwards-compatible, I'm happy to review to discuss the next steps.

Thanks for the ideas. I'll see if I can work on that and submit a PR. Could be an interesting use case.

Hi, may I ask if you are working on it? Maybe a new queue based plugin can be introduced.

[k8s-triage-robot]

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-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active 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 rotten
• Close this issue with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

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

/lifecycle rotten

[k8s-triage-robot]

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

This bot triages 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:

• Reopen this issue with /reopen
• Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

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

/close not-planned

[k8s-ci-robot]

@k8s-triage-robot: Closing this issue, marking it as "Not Planned".

In response to this:

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

This bot triages 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:

• Reopen this issue with /reopen
• Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

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

/close not-planned

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.