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.

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

Add support for the managedBy field #646

Closed
mimowo opened this issue Aug 5, 2024 · 6 comments · Fixed by #650
Closed

Add support for the managedBy field #646

mimowo opened this issue Aug 5, 2024 · 6 comments · Fixed by #650
Assignees

Comments

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor

mimowo commented Aug 5, 2024

What you would like to be added?

The support for the managedBy field which can delegate reconciliation from built-in controller, to a custom one.

The semantics of the field are:

  • whenever the value is set, and it does not point to the built-in operator, then skip reconciliation
  • the field is immutable
  • the field is not defaulted

Why is this needed?

For context, we have in Kueue the effort (see Support Kubeflow Jobs in MultiKueue) to support kubeflow-training (it will include MPIJob), but it will not be complete without the support for managedBy.

The complete support for the users of MultiKueue (multi-cluster Kueue) means:

  • simpler installation (just follow the standard installation path), otherwise only installation of MPIJob CRDs is required
  • support for mixed setup in one cluster - some MPIJob could be run by MultiKueue and some by the default operator

The efforts to support the field in:

Love this feature?

Give it a 👍 We prioritize the features with most 👍

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor Author

mimowo commented Aug 5, 2024

/cc @andreyvelich @tenzen-y

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor Author

mimowo commented Aug 5, 2024

xref for the similar issue in the training operator: kubeflow/training-operator#2193

@tenzen-y
Copy link
Member

tenzen-y commented Aug 14, 2024

As we discussed in kubeflow community meeting, basically, I'm fine with this feature.
But, I would like to know what @alculquicondor thinks since maybe I don't have enough bandwidth to review this feature.

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Collaborator

+1 to this feature.

I also can't promise review bandwidth, but it's something that needs to be done for consistency with the other APIs.

@tenzen-y
Copy link
Member

@mszadkow Do you have any plans to work on this issue?

@mszadkow
Copy link
Contributor

/assign

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants