-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39.7k
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
Eviction: ignore PDBs if pods with DeletionTimestamp #91342
Eviction: ignore PDBs if pods with DeletionTimestamp #91342
Conversation
Hi @michaelgugino. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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. |
0ac0b68
to
7343828
Compare
/sig apps |
/ok-to-test |
/retest |
1 similar comment
/retest |
When using the eviction API, if a pod already has a non-zero DeletionTimestamp, we don't need to check PDBs as it has already been marked for deletion.
7343828
to
dd49915
Compare
/retest |
/lgtm |
/retest |
/retest /assign @liggitt |
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: liggitt, michaelgugino 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 |
/test pull-kubernetes-typecheck |
/test pull-kubernetes-integration |
/retest |
In kubernetes#91342 attempting to evict a Pod with a DeletionTimestamp caused checking of PDBs to be ignored due to the fact that a Pod scheduled for deletion should not be factored into a disruption budget. However, PDB eviction tests currently will sometimes select a Pod already scheduled for deletion, expecting that attempting to evict it will conflict with the PDB. This updates those tests to make sure a Pod with deletion timestamp is not selected for eviction when it is intended to violate a PDB. Signed-off-by: hasheddan <[email protected]>
…heduled for deletion In kubernetes#91342 attempting to evict a Pod with a DeletionTimestamp caused checking of PDBs to be ignored due to the fact that a Pod scheduled for deletion should not be factored into a disruption budget. However, PDB eviction tests currently will sometimes select a Pod already scheduled for deletion, expecting that attempting to evict it will conflict with the PDB. This updates those tests to make sure a Pod with deletion timestamp is not selected for eviction when it is intended to violate a PDB. Signed-off-by: hasheddan <[email protected]>
In kubernetes#91342 attempting to evict a Pod with a DeletionTimestamp caused checking of PDBs to be ignored due to the fact that a Pod scheduled for deletion should not be factored into a disruption budget. However, PDB eviction tests currently will sometimes select a Pod already scheduled for deletion, expecting that attempting to evict it will conflict with the PDB. This updates those tests to make sure a Pod with deletion timestamp is not selected for eviction when it is intended to violate a PDB. Signed-off-by: hasheddan <[email protected]>
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
What this PR does / why we need it:
When using the eviction API, if a pod already has
a non-zero DeletionTimestamp, we don't need to check
PDBs as it has already been marked for deletion.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes # #91141
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: