Document the new NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread feature gate #35044

kerthcet · 2022-07-15T06:09:01Z

Signed-off-by: kerthcet kerthcet@gmail.com

Ref: kubernetes/enhancements#3094
/sig scheduling

netlify · 2022-07-15T06:09:07Z

👷 Deploy Preview for kubernetes-io-vnext-staging processing.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	`3b0b5b9`
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-vnext-staging/deploys/62fc533eb0e39700086103b4

chrisnegus

/lgtm

sftim · 2022-07-18T19:45:35Z

This doesn't seem to be ready for review.
/lgtm cancel

kerthcet · 2022-07-28T08:55:41Z

Document is ready to review now. cc @alculquicondor

cathchu · 2022-07-29T19:39:19Z

Hey there 👋 @kerthcet, 1.25 Release Docs Shadow here!

Thanks for filing this placeholder. As a reminder, final docs PRs are due August 9th. Take a look at Documenting a release for additional information for the docs requirement for the release.

Thanks again!

reylejano · 2022-08-04T05:15:20Z

/milestone 1.25
/assign @cathchu
/cc @kcmartin

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints.md

alculquicondor · 2022-08-04T19:21:04Z

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints.md

@@ -123,6 +125,33 @@ your cluster. Those fields are:
  See [Label Selectors](/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/labels/#label-selectors)
  for more details.


We have improved our API docs a lot to include definitions of "topology domain", "eligible domain", and others. For example: https://github.com/kubernetes/api/blob/c8f06018bfc8e3c8213c53ec87b7fa4e2b9121ab/core/v1/types.go#L3396

Could you add those in this doc?

Maybe we could add the definitions before talking about the field themselves.

It's also OK to link to https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/workload-resources/pod-v1/#scheduling (ie, in Markdown it'd be [anchor text](/docs/reference/kubernetes-api/workload-resources/pod-v1/#scheduling)) if that's useful. No need to repeat the API reference word-for-word.

Thanks, updated

content/en/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates.md

sftim · 2022-08-06T16:43:59Z

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints.md

@@ -556,7 +585,7 @@ section of the enhancement proposal about Pod topology spread constraints.
  cluster. This could lead to a problem in autoscaled clusters, when a node pool (or
  node group) is scaled to zero nodes, and you're expecting the cluster to scale up,
  because, in this case, those topology domains won't be considered until there is
-  at least one node in them.  


Please retain the line break here (triggered by two spaces at the end of the line).

Should we? I found other paragraphs don't have this. It was auto formatted.

Maybe use an actual empty line?

If you'd like to insist this change, at least make it a separate commit (or even separate PR). It's not part of documenting NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread.

hold for #35966
/hold

content/en/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates.md

sftim · 2022-08-09T10:33:25Z

content/en/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates.md

@@ -1010,7 +1010,7 @@ Each feature gate is designed for enabling/disabling a specific feature:
  allowing the selection of a port range instead of a single port.
 - `NetworkPolicyStatus`: Enable the `status` subresource for NetworkPolicy objects.
 - `NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread`: Enable using `nodeAffinityPolicy` and `nodeTaintsPolicy`
-  in Pod [topology spread constraints](/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/pod-topology-spread-constraints/)
+  in Pod [topology spread constraints](/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints/)


Suggested change

in Pod [topology spread constraints](/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints/)

in [Pod topology spread constraints](/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints/)

alculquicondor

:( I forgot to send my review last week

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints.md

alculquicondor · 2022-08-09T17:11:49Z

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints.md

+	We consider each <key, value> as a "bucket", and try to put balanced number
+	of pods into each bucket.
+	We define a domain as a particular instance of a topology.


I just realized we were saying the same thing twice.

Suggested change

We consider each <key, value> as a "bucket", and try to put balanced number

of pods into each bucket.

We define a domain as a particular instance of a topology.

We call each instance of a topology (in other words, a <key, value> pair) a domain. The scheduler will try to put a balanced number of pods into each domain.

You can fix the API too, but we can leave that for 1.26.

Updated as advised in another PR #35966, this one only focus on the new feature introduced.

alculquicondor · 2022-08-09T17:15:00Z

content/en/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints.md

@@ -556,7 +585,7 @@ section of the enhancement proposal about Pod topology spread constraints.
  cluster. This could lead to a problem in autoscaled clusters, when a node pool (or
  node group) is scaled to zero nodes, and you're expecting the cluster to scale up,
  because, in this case, those topology domains won't be considered until there is
-  at least one node in them.  


Maybe use an actual empty line?

alculquicondor · 2022-08-16T13:25:40Z

I can lgtm after rebase

Signed-off-by: kerthcet <kerthcet@gmail.com>

kerthcet · 2022-08-17T02:32:33Z

Rebased.

kerthcet · 2022-08-17T02:32:58Z

/hold cancel

tengqm · 2022-08-17T09:08:00Z

/approve

k8s-ci-robot · 2022-08-17T09:08:21Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: tengqm

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:

~~content/en/OWNERS~~ [tengqm]

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

cathchu · 2022-08-17T13:46:12Z

/lgtm

k8s-ci-robot · 2022-08-17T13:46:31Z

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: ae161d09cb8f224bc723ba5f1763063b69d79572

k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Jul 15, 2022

k8s-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jul 15, 2022

k8s-ci-robot requested a review from rajeshdeshpande02 July 15, 2022 06:09

k8s-ci-robot added the language/en Issues or PRs related to English language label Jul 15, 2022

k8s-ci-robot requested a review from sftim July 15, 2022 06:09

k8s-ci-robot added the sig/docs Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Docs. label Jul 15, 2022

chrisnegus reviewed Jul 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot assigned chrisnegus Jul 18, 2022

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 18, 2022

k8s-ci-robot assigned sftim Jul 18, 2022

k8s-ci-robot removed the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 18, 2022

k8s-ci-robot requested a review from chrisnegus July 18, 2022 19:45

This was referenced Jul 23, 2022

remove SelectorSpread plugin kubernetes/kubernetes#108444

Closed

Take taints/tolerations into consideration when calculating PodTopologySpread skew kubernetes/enhancements#3094

Open

kerthcet force-pushed the feat/topology-policy branch from 89c8cd9 to c20b438 Compare July 28, 2022 08:46

k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jul 28, 2022

kerthcet marked this pull request as ready for review July 28, 2022 08:47

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jul 28, 2022

k8s-ci-robot requested review from daminisatya and jimangel July 28, 2022 08:47

kerthcet force-pushed the feat/topology-policy branch from c20b438 to b2683dd Compare July 28, 2022 08:54

kerthcet force-pushed the feat/topology-policy branch from b2683dd to fbd534d Compare July 28, 2022 08:58

kerthcet changed the title ~~Add introductions to NodeInclusionPolicy~~ Document the new NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread feature gate Jul 28, 2022

k8s-ci-robot removed language/fr Issues or PRs related to French language language/id Issues or PRs related to Indonesian language language/uk Issues or PRs related to Ukrainian language language/zh Issues or PRs related to Chinese language labels Aug 3, 2022

k8s-ci-robot assigned cathchu Aug 4, 2022

k8s-ci-robot added this to the 1.25 milestone Aug 4, 2022

k8s-ci-robot requested a review from kcmartin August 4, 2022 05:15

alculquicondor reviewed Aug 4, 2022

View reviewed changes

sftim reviewed Aug 6, 2022

View reviewed changes

content/en/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

sftim reviewed Aug 9, 2022

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Aug 15, 2022

alculquicondor reviewed Aug 15, 2022

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 16, 2022

Document the new NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread feature gate

3b0b5b9

Signed-off-by: kerthcet <kerthcet@gmail.com>

kerthcet force-pushed the feat/topology-policy branch from 4a66046 to 3b0b5b9 Compare August 17, 2022 02:32

k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Aug 17, 2022

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Aug 17, 2022

k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 17, 2022

k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 17, 2022

k8s-ci-robot merged commit a98137b into kubernetes:dev-1.25 Aug 17, 2022

kerthcet deleted the feat/topology-policy branch August 17, 2022 14:45

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Document the new NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread feature gate #35044

Document the new NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread feature gate #35044

kerthcet commented Jul 15, 2022

netlify bot commented Jul 15, 2022 •

edited

Loading

chrisnegus left a comment

sftim commented Jul 18, 2022

kerthcet commented Jul 28, 2022

cathchu commented Jul 29, 2022

reylejano commented Aug 4, 2022

alculquicondor Aug 4, 2022

sftim Aug 6, 2022

kerthcet Aug 9, 2022

sftim Aug 6, 2022

kerthcet Aug 9, 2022

alculquicondor Aug 9, 2022

sftim Aug 14, 2022

kerthcet Aug 15, 2022

sftim Aug 9, 2022

kerthcet Aug 9, 2022 •

edited

Loading

alculquicondor left a comment

alculquicondor Aug 9, 2022

alculquicondor Aug 9, 2022

kerthcet Aug 16, 2022

alculquicondor Aug 9, 2022

alculquicondor commented Aug 16, 2022

kerthcet commented Aug 17, 2022

kerthcet commented Aug 17, 2022

tengqm commented Aug 17, 2022

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 17, 2022

cathchu commented Aug 17, 2022

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 17, 2022

		@@ -123,6 +125,33 @@ your cluster. Those fields are:
		See [Label Selectors](/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/labels/#label-selectors)
		for more details.

	in Pod [topology spread constraints](/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints/)
	in [Pod topology spread constraints](/docs/concepts/scheduling-eviction/topology-spread-constraints/)

Document the new NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread feature gate #35044

Document the new NodeInclusionPolicyInPodTopologySpread feature gate #35044

Conversation

kerthcet commented Jul 15, 2022

netlify bot commented Jul 15, 2022 • edited Loading

👷 Deploy Preview for kubernetes-io-vnext-staging processing.

chrisnegus left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sftim commented Jul 18, 2022

kerthcet commented Jul 28, 2022

cathchu commented Jul 29, 2022

reylejano commented Aug 4, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

kerthcet Aug 9, 2022 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alculquicondor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

alculquicondor commented Aug 16, 2022

kerthcet commented Aug 17, 2022

kerthcet commented Aug 17, 2022

tengqm commented Aug 17, 2022

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 17, 2022

cathchu commented Aug 17, 2022

k8s-ci-robot commented Aug 17, 2022

netlify bot commented Jul 15, 2022 •

edited

Loading

kerthcet Aug 9, 2022 •

edited

Loading