add flag to ignore requests scaling up or down
Which component this PR applies to?
addon-resizer
What type of PR is this?
feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR exposes flag to ignore the scaling of the requests and only scale the limits. In large clusters, scaling requests will cause the scheduling issues for other workload pods. This flag enables to scale only the limits and have the specified fixed requests as is.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Yes
Introduced --ignoreResourceRequests flag to ignore the scaling of the resource requests.
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:
The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.
- :white_check_mark: login: ganga1980 / name: Ganga Mahesh Siddem (c54de466b796665ea6c9216393e3ff01dfc926cd)
Welcome @ganga1980!
It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/autoscaler 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.
You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.
You can also check if kubernetes/autoscaler has its own contribution guidelines.
You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.
If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!
Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. :smiley:
Hi, @jbartosik, @wojtek-t, can you guys help on reviewing this PR?
Hi, @jbartosik , @wojtek-t , Appreciate your help on reviewing this PR as I would like to get this change merged soon.
I can't really comment on the functionality itself so here's just a comment regarding the "how it is done": given that we have already a setting for which values are to be controlled by the VPA (controlledValues with currently possible values RequestsOnly and RequestsAndLimits), it would probably better fit in there as LimitsOnly.
I can't really comment on the functionality itself so here's just a comment regarding the "how it is done": given that we have already a setting for which values are to be controlled by the VPA (
controlledValueswith currently possible valuesRequestsOnlyandRequestsAndLimits), it would probably better fit in there asLimitsOnly.
Thanks for feedback. I dont see ControlledValues being used in addon-resizer and code refence which you have pointed out is from VPA.
I dont see ControlledValues being used in addon-resizer and code refence which you have pointed out is from VPA.
Oh, sorry, my bad! I should have paid more attention to what I was looking at ;o
I dont see ControlledValues being used in addon-resizer and code refence which you have pointed out is from VPA.
Oh, sorry, my bad! I should have paid more attention to what I was looking at ;o
No problem. Thanks for looking at this PR. Would you able to help review and approving this PR?
Hi, @jbartosik , can you please help on reviewing this PR?
Hi, @jbartosik, @wojtek-t , sorry to bug you guys on this. If you guys don't have cycles to review, can you please tag the folks who can help on reviewing this PR?
Hi, I don't have capacity to review this. I'm pretty sure Wojciech doesn't either.
I'll ask if someone wants to review this on the next SIG meeting on Monday. You can try also try asking for volunteers on Slack.
/assign @mainred
@ganga1980: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: mainred.
Note that only kubernetes members, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time. For more information please see the contributor guide
In response to this:
/assign @mainred
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.
@ganga1980 The description in the first comment is not entirely clear. Can you please update the PR with the following?
- Clear documentation of the flag and its requirement.
- Testing proof, unit tests
- PR details for the release notes
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED
This pull-request has been approved by: ganga1980
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign bskiba for approval by writing /assign @bskiba in a comment. For more information see:The Kubernetes Code Review Process.
The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment
@ganga1980: PR needs rebase.
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.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Mark this issue or PR as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle stale - Mark this issue or PR as rotten with
/lifecycle rotten - Close this issue or PR with
/close - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle stale
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the issue is closed
You can:
- Mark this issue or PR as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten - Close this issue or PR with
/close - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle rotten
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied - After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the PR is closed
You can:
- Reopen this PR with
/reopen - Mark this PR as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten - Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/close
@k8s-triage-robot: Closed this PR.
In response to this:
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.
This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:
- After 90d of inactivity,
lifecycle/staleis applied- After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/stalewas applied,lifecycle/rottenis applied- After 30d of inactivity since
lifecycle/rottenwas applied, the PR is closedYou can:
- Reopen this PR with
/reopen- Mark this PR as fresh with
/remove-lifecycle rotten- Offer to help out with Issue Triage
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/close
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.