Marco Pracucci
Marco Pracucci
> @pracucci is there more left to implement or is this issue done? From my perspective it's done. I don't plan further development on this.
> it won't prevent from future modifications breaking it again I agree a test should be added to avoid future regression. I just think we shouldn't block the revert because...
To my understanding, `kube-proxy` is defined in a static manifest file and the pod spec has the `scheduler.alpha.kubernetes.io/critical-pod` annotation. This annotation is used by the `kubelet` to check if the...
I've also opened this issue on Kubernetes, to gather some more feedback on the topic. I would like to better understand how it works under the hood, in order to...
@justinsb @mikesplain Do you have any thought or experience on this?
@luanguimaraesla I'm not aware of reliable workarounds to avoid it, but if you find any I would be very interested as well. Looking at the `kubelet` code, once a static...
I haven't checked the changes required to support it, but I think at least we should support it in the query-frontend, and then propagate it to every partial query pushed...
Is it worth to do the same on the write path, avoiding to pass exemplars from distributors to ingesters if they've been disabled for a given tenant?
> Will your installation struggle under certain conditions if you do not pay attention to this setting? It will (large tenant setup). The settings you're talking about go way beyond...
@eamonryan Have you considered this? https://github.com/grafana/mimir/pull/4621#issuecomment-1504783389