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

Raise the resync period to something more reasonable. #1208

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 30, 2021

Conversation

mattmoor
Copy link
Member

A 30s resync period is an unfortunate anti-pattern perpetuated by k8s.io/sample-controller, which has historically:

  • Masked bugs due to a missing informer event (hidden in e2e tests by the frequent "resync"),
  • Leads to problems at scale (lots of resources) because 30s is inadequate to process all resources continuously.

The controller.DefaultResyncPeriod is 10h adopted from controller-runtime, and the main motivation for using
anything lower than this would be if it were necessary to poll an external system not modeled by informers, where
the resync period effectively becomes a ceiling on the poll interval.

/kind cleanup

Submitter Checklist

These are the criteria that every PR should meet, please check them off as you
review them:

  • Includes tests (if functionality changed/added)
  • Includes docs (if user facing)
  • Commit messages follow commit message best practices
  • Release notes block has been filled in or deleted (only if no user facing changes)

See the contribution guide for more details.

Release Notes

NONE

A 30s resync period is an unfortunate anti-pattern perpetuated by `k8s.io/sample-controller`, which has historically:
 * Masked bugs due to a missing informer event (hidden in e2e tests by the frequent "resync"),
 * Leads to problems at scale (lots of resources) because 30s is inadequate to process all resources continuously.

The `controller.DefaultResyncPeriod` is `10h` adopted from controller-runtime, and the main motivation for using
anything lower than this would be if it were necessary to poll an external system not modeled by informers, where
the resync period effectively becomes a ceiling on the poll interval.
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesnt merit a release note. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. labels Aug 29, 2021
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 29, 2021
@mattmoor
Copy link
Member Author

I'm opening this in isolation to let CI tell me if/what breaks from this, since whenever I see this there are invariably latent bugs masked by it. 😅

@mattmoor
Copy link
Member Author

/assign @dibyom @savitaashture

@tekton-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: savitaashture

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

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 30, 2021
@dlorenc
Copy link
Contributor

dlorenc commented Aug 30, 2021

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 30, 2021
@tekton-robot tekton-robot merged commit 56c21b0 into tektoncd:main Aug 30, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesnt merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants