-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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
Bump autoscaler resources to be equal to controller resources #10865
Bump autoscaler resources to be equal to controller resources #10865
Conversation
The autoscaler is a controller of a few resources after all and it's doing a lot more work asynchronously too.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #10865 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 87.96% 88.02% +0.05%
==========================================
Files 188 188
Lines 9102 9102
==========================================
+ Hits 8007 8012 +5
+ Misses 837 835 -2
+ Partials 258 255 -3
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
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.
checked with @cdlliuy and our prod numbers based on load testing are a fair bit higher even than this so this seems likely to be a better out of the box experience for people
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.
looks reasonable
/lgmt
/approve
/hold
if anyone is against.
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: julz, vagababov 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 |
/unhold nobody complained :) |
/lgtm |
Proposed Changes
The autoscaler is a controller of a few resources after all and it's doing a lot more work asynchronously too. We've (Red Hat Openshift Serverless) been seeing quite a lot of CPU throttling in the autoscaler and the limits and requests seem indeed to be fairly low given the work the autoscaler is doing. This aligns the resources with the controller but we surely need a better way to set these values and/or communicate what the expected amount of handled resources can be.
Release Note
/assign @julz @vagababov