-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14.5k
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
Promote StatefulSet MinReadySeconds to GA #35539
Promote StatefulSet MinReadySeconds to GA #35539
Conversation
✅ Pull request preview available for checkingBuilt without sensitive environment variables
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
This should target 'dev-1.25' branch rather than 'main'. |
Oh yes, my bad. Thanks for the check, @tengqm ! :) |
available as soon as it is ready). To learn more about when a Pod is considered ready, see | ||
[Container Probes](/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/pod-lifecycle/#container-probes). | ||
This defaults to 0 (the Pod will be considered available as soon as it is ready). To learn more about when | ||
a Pod is considered ready, see [Container Probes](/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/pod-lifecycle/#container-probes). | ||
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would make it clear that minReadySeconds
is really there to phase the rollout of new or updated StatefulSets (whereas probe thresholds are the right thing to use if you want to, eg, see that the Pod has had a healthcheck every 2 seconds and that there have been 30 successful ones, which implies that the Pod is ready for traffic).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good suggestion, but we also say that here https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/controllers/statefulset/#rolling-updates.
Please let me know if you are satisfied with the current state.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'd like to repeat that detail under the Minimum Ready Seconds heading, in case people didn't arrive via https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/controllers/statefulset/#rolling-updates.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you think about having a link to the Rolling Updates
so we do not have to define the strategy again? commit updated..
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@sftim -- do you still have concerns, or can we approve this?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@sftim looks like this was merged without the comment being addressed, do we need any further followup?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It'd be nice to fix that, but that fix can happen after v1.25 ships.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What do you think about having a link to the Rolling Updates so we do not have to define the strategy again?
I can post an update, but what are problems with this approach? ^
This should be against dev-1.25 branch, since that's covering a feature going GA in 1.25 |
d535f22
to
3556301
Compare
Thanks for the review. I tried to resolve it and changed the branch. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
from tech pov
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: cb13306d16474bfa1e04b210ccbd39013a75c0a6
|
/assign @kcmartin |
3556301
to
47fc402
Compare
👷 Deploy Preview for kubernetes-io-vnext-staging processing.
|
47fc402
to
e50094c
Compare
e50094c
to
9d7efb1
Compare
@sftim ping regarding #35539 (comment) |
/lgtm |
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 3cf8c98d569ed4b38f00673b7efe1db90df80d9d
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: soltysh, 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
adds docs for StatefulSet MinReadySeconds GA promotion