Coscheduling: remove podgroup.scheduled

[Gekko0114]

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug
/kind cleanup

Optionally add one or more of the following kinds if applicable:
/kind api-change

What this PR does / why we need it:

The removal of the PostBind function for PodGroups has caused the PodGroupStatus.Scheduled field to no longer update and remain at 0.

I have removed the field PodGroupStatus.Scheduled as it is no longer required. Additionally, I have also removed unnecessary statuses from the PodGroupPhase.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #562 , #578

Special notes for your reviewer:

Thank you for reviewing this PR.
Please let me know if I have made any mistakes or if there are any improvements that could be made.
Your comments and feedback are appreciated.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Remove podGroupStatus.Scheduled.
Remove two podGroupPhase (podGroupPreScheduling and podGroupScheduled)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @Gekko0114. 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/test-infra repository.

[Huang-Wei]

/ok-to-test

[Huang-Wei]

/assign @zwpaper

[zwpaper]

hi @Gekko0114, thanks for raising the PR, but I have reconsidered the scheduling status flow and found that there may be something we need to discuss before deleting the phases.

1. there are some cases making the PodGroup partially running, like some pods in the group failed and were rescheduling, then the PodGroup should be in a Scheduling status
2. in the case like 1., we have a running count less than expected, and would get some scheduling counts, so, the scheduled number could mean something?
3. we should be fine to drop the PostBind related, but I will raise an issue to discuss the schedule flow before deleting the status

cc @Huang-Wei WDYT?

[zwpaper]

#578
created a issue

cc @Huang-Wei

[Gekko0114]

@zwpaper
Sure. Let's discuss this topic on the issue #578 . Thanks,

[Gekko0114]

@zwpaper, @denkensk
Based on the discussion, I've updated this PR.
Could you take a look?

[Gekko0114]

@zwpaper, @denkensk
Could you take a look?

[zwpaper]

Sorry for the delay, but I was swamped whose days both personal and work, it may take some more time to be accessible, I will try to find some time to have a look at this recently

[Gekko0114]

No problem, thank you so much.

[zwpaper]

hi @Gekko0114, I have done the review, the PR is great, and only some small nit.

I will test the logic locally and then we will be good

[Gekko0114]

Hi @zwpaper,

Thanks for your review! I've fixed it. Could you have a look?

[zwpaper]

Hi, @Gekko0114 really sorry for taking so long, I am back to Open Source finally.

I have test the scheduler locally, and with one more tiny request,

please also remove the postBind in README so that users can follow the readme to start the scheduler without meeting error:
https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/scheduler-plugins/blob/master/pkg/coscheduling/README.md?plain=1#L78-L80

and then we would be good to go!

[Gekko0114]

Hi @zwpaper,

Thanks for your comment! I missed README. I've fixed it

[zwpaper]

/lgtm

/assign @Huang-Wei @denkensk

[Huang-Wei]

LGTM. just one nit on the diagram text.

And could you detail the changes in release-notes? (as the changes involved removal of two phases and one field in status)

/hold

[Gekko0114]

@Huang-Wei ,

Thanks for your comments! I fixed it. Could you have a look again?

[Huang-Wei]

/lgtm
/approve
/label tide/merge-method-squash

Thanks @Gekko0114 !

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Gekko0114, Huang-Wei

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:

• OWNERS [Huang-Wei]

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

[Gekko0114]

Hi @Huang-Wei
Thanks!
This PR has hold tag.
Could you remove it if it's ok?

[Huang-Wei]

Ah sure.

/unhold