Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Update karpenter_scheduler_unschedulable_pods_count #2006

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update karpenter_scheduler_unschedulable_pods_count #2006

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+1 −4

Conversation

priyanshikhetwani
Copy link

karpenter_scheduler_unschedulable_pods_count has unnecessary DeletePartialMatch in the scheduler

Fixes #1993

Description
karpenter_scheduler_unschedulable_pods_count is set at the top of every provisioning loop -- realistically, this value is continually set as provisioning loops are run and we shouldn't need this metric in the disruption loops (because we expect that there are going to be cases with consolidation where pods won't schedule) -- we should remove the DeletePartialMatch as well as the controller label on the metric since it's unneccesary

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Feb 18, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: priyanshikhetwani
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign ellistarn for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @priyanshikhetwani!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/karpenter 🎉. 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-sigs/karpenter 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. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Feb 18, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @priyanshikhetwani. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

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-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Feb 18, 2025
@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 13399319610

Details

  • 0 of 0 changed or added relevant lines in 0 files are covered.
  • 3 unchanged lines in 1 file lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.01%) to 81.461%
Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
pkg/controllers/provisioning/scheduling/nodeclaim.go 3 86.98%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 13378807880: -0.01%
Covered Lines: 9245
Relevant Lines: 11349
💛 - Coveralls

jonathan-innis
jonathan-innis reviewed Feb 19, 2025
View reviewed changes
pkg/controllers/provisioning/scheduling/scheduler.go
@@ -219,9 +219,6 @@ func (s *Scheduler) Solve(ctx context.Context, pods []*corev1.Pod) Results {
// had 5xA pods and 5xB pods were they have a zonal topology spread, but A can only go in one zone and B in another.
// We need to schedule them alternating, A, B, A, B, .... and this solution also solves that as well.
errors := map[*corev1.Pod]error{}
// Reset the metric for the controller, so we don't keep old ids around
UnschedulablePodsCount.DeletePartialMatch(map[string]string{ControllerLabel: injection.GetControllerName(ctx)})
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do we need to drop the controller label when this metric is set too?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jonathan-innis jonathan-innis jonathan-innis left review comments

@engedaam engedaam Awaiting requested review from engedaam

@jackfrancis jackfrancis Awaiting requested review from jackfrancis

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

karpenter_scheduler_unschedulable_pods_count has unnecessary DeletePartialMatch in the scheduler
4 participants
@priyanshikhetwani @k8s-ci-robot @coveralls @jonathan-innis