-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
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
Add documentation for check-capacity Provisioning class #6904
Conversation
3bd0405
to
92b4c5a
Compare
/label tide/merge-method-squash |
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.
/lgtm
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.
One nit otherwise
/lgtm
@kisieland: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators 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-sigs/prow repository. |
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.
Sending a couple of suggestions. Thanks!
/assign @MaciekPytel |
cluster-autoscaler/FAQ.md
Outdated
### How can I use ProvisioningRequest to run batch workloads | ||
|
||
ProvisioningRequest (or ProvReq) is a new namespaced Custom Resource that allows you to ask CA for capacity for groups of pods. For a detailed explanation of the ProvisioningRequest API, please refer to the | ||
[proposal](https://github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/blob/master/cluster-autoscaler/proposals/provisioning-request.md). |
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.
Is that up to date? IIRC we've made some changes from the original design during the implementation?
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 think implementation details are not correct, but the API didn't change except of suffix, so I think it's ok to refer this proposal for detailed explanation of the ProvisioningRequest API.
I added "original proposal" to emphasise that some other details of the proposal could be outdated.
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: kisieland, MaciekPytel, yaroslava-serdiuk The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
/lgtm |
What type of PR is this?
/kind documentation
#6814