karmada
karmada copied to clipboard
Proposal: Add API Server Service Information to `KarmadaStatus`
What type of PR is this?
/kind design
What this PR does / why we need it:
- Details are contained in the proposal.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes: Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:
NONE
:warning: Please install the to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.
Codecov Report
All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:
Project coverage is 42.30%. Comparing base (
5f7fc4f) to head (e8c81c5). Report is 231 commits behind head on master.
:exclamation: Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.
Additional details and impacted files
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #5599 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 34.84% 42.30% +7.46%
==========================================
Files 645 655 +10
Lines 44861 55756 +10895
==========================================
+ Hits 15633 23590 +7957
- Misses 28021 30652 +2631
- Partials 1207 1514 +307
| Flag | Coverage Δ | |
|---|---|---|
| unittests | 42.30% <ø> (+7.46%) |
:arrow_up: |
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.
The services created by Karmada can have four different types.
In order to make better decisions regarding the most suitable API form, I conducted tests on different service types and documented for reference: doc link
I hope this will be helpful to all !
Thanks @chaosi-zju for your effort. Yes, we noticed that currently, karmada-operator allows people to config all kinds of Service types, and @jabellard analyzed it in the discussion above. Glad to see the test report, I believe it can help us figure out the situation more clearly.
But, I can't access the doc, just sent a request for that :) :)
I conducted tests on different service types and documented for reference: doc link
@chaosi-zju , thank you for this. I'd love to learn more about your findings. I just sent you a request to get access to the doc.
Hi @jabellard Generally looks good to me.
From the test report @chaosi-zju provided on above, we can tell that:
- Currently we supports 2 Service types, there are
ClusterIPandNodePort.- The
Loadbalanceris not supported yet, but I think it makes sense to enhance it this time. See the use case on When installing karmada using the operator, provide a way to annotate karmadaAPIServer services #4634.So I just opened #5767 to track all of this. Any thoughts?
@RainbowMango , thanks for sharing this and also to @chaosi-zju for generating this thorough report. I'll keep on eye on these action items. I just pushed some changes to address your comments.
Thanks Joe, I think we are ready to go after squashing the commits.
We can start to implemente it now.
Thanks Joe, I think we are ready to go after squashing the commits.
We can start to implemente it now.
Just squashed. I started the implementation, and will send a PR for that soon.
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED
This pull-request has been approved by: RainbowMango
The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
The pull request process is described here
- ~~OWNERS~~ [RainbowMango]
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment
The failing test is unrelated. We can retest it by leaving a comment /retest after all tests are finished.
tracked by #5136
/retest
- Currently we supports 2 Service types, there are
ClusterIPandLoadbalancer.
This statement seems to be misspelled, Loadbalancer should be NodePort
Right, thanks. Updated on https://github.com/karmada-io/karmada/pull/5599#pullrequestreview-2409681400.