-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 40
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
Leader remove runlocal #7
Leader remove runlocal #7
Conversation
Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 181321825
💛 - Coveralls |
1b6db72
to
9eabf9d
Compare
9eabf9d
to
affe8aa
Compare
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 more review round (sorry!)
And another thing that just popped into my head. It occurs to me that controller-runtime has some pre- and post- leader-election runnables as part of the manager. I wonder if it would be possible to shim this leader election implementation into controller-runtime. This point is not a PR a blocker, but it would be nice to handle in a follow-up if it is possible. I'll investigate and report back.
leader/leader_test.go
Outdated
var _ = Describe("Leader", func() { | ||
|
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 this Describe
layer is unnecessary. Every test in this suite (i.e. package) is a leader test.
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.
If I remove it, it doesn't seem to work. I renamed it to Leader election
to better describe it. I would say, it works so I'd rather not change this.
leader/leader.go
Outdated
var log = logf.Log.WithName("leader") | ||
|
||
// maxBackoffInterval defines the maximum amount of time to wait between | ||
// attempts to become the leader. | ||
const maxBackoffInterval = time.Second * 16 | ||
|
||
type Option func(*config) error |
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.
Ah crap. I totally messed this up. Now that I'm seeing this, I feel like it's a little user-hostile. If we don't export Config
, users can't provide their own Option
implementations.
Given that we only have one field to set, it might not seem important now, but if we add more fields in the future, we want to give users the flexibility to write their own Option
s.
Opening this up later would be a breaking change to the Option
definition.
So given all of this, I think we want:
type Option func(*Config) error
type Config struct { ... }
// now that Config is exported, setDefaults would need
// to be unexported since this only needs to be called
// by us after all options have run.
func (c *Config) setDefaults() error { ... }
Sorry for the back and forth!
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.
Reverted the commit that unexported Config. I then added a new commit to unexport just setDefaults
Following up about controller-runtime manager integration. It doesn't seem immediately do-able given controller-runtime's direct use of Here's where the manager starts the pre-leader-election runnables vs the post-leader-election runnables: https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime/blob/ab02953d0bcb6467333fcc5809eb1df83a8d89c4/pkg/manager/internal.go#L465-L478. The only way I can see this working would be for controller-runtime to give callers a hook into type LeaderElector interface {
Run(context.Context)
} And then a new manager Option field: type Option struct {
// NewLeaderElector overrides the default lease-based leader elector
// and allows callers to use their own leader election implementation.
NewLeaderElector func(leaderelection.LeaderCallbacks) LeaderElector
} This would definitely require a controller-runtime proposal and thorough discussion, so not anything that could happen anytime really soon. |
// Become ensures that the current pod is the leader within its namespace. If | ||
// run outside a cluster, it will skip leader election and return nil. It | ||
// continuously tries to create a ConfigMap with the provided name and the | ||
// current pod set as the owner reference. Only one can exist at a time with | ||
// the same name, so the pod that successfully creates the ConfigMap is the | ||
// leader. Upon termination of that pod, the garbage collector will delete the | ||
// ConfigMap, enabling a different pod to become the leader. | ||
func Become(ctx context.Context, lockName string) error { | ||
func Become(ctx context.Context, lockName string, opts ...Option) error { |
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.
We replaced the sdk impl for the controller-runtime one. So, I do not think that we need to keep it at all.
@joelanford why we will keep our implementation since all opers now are using the controller-runtime one? If yes, i need to revert the change made in operator-framework/operator-sdk#3514.
c/c @jmrodri
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.
@camilamacedo86 my understanding was that this is a leader for life and we kept it for someone that wanted to have leader for life. It will not be used in the SDK but could be used by an operator developer.
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.
A lot of existing operators are using the leader-for-life implementation. They'll either need a way to continue using that, or will need an easy path to migrating to the lease-based election.
These days the lease-based election is easy to use and robust, which hasn't always been the case. But even still, each pattern has advantages and disadvantages.
|
||
err := Become(context.TODO(), "leader-test", WithClient(client)) | ||
Expect(err).Should(BeNil()) | ||
}) |
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.
Can we add a test case for returning ErrNoNamespace
from Become
and using errors.Is(err, ErrNoNamespace)
?
769d3ca
to
dac301c
Compare
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
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
No description provided.