-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
*: add InstallType to InstallConfig #4209
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
Closed
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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 feel like there's a more descriptive name to be found, and it should be an enum at least... seems like it will inevitably become mirror of PlatformType to some degree but with different lifecycle implications.
Is a raw enum going to be enough? (It wasn't for platform type.) What's the relationship between this type and and platform types? Which combinations are supported, and what are the clear semantics and cluster implications for each type and combination of type/platform? etc.
Would a vendor annotation on the installconfig make any sense as an alternative if we aren't able to more carefully specify these things right now?
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.
(see: openshift/enhancements#480 (comment))
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 agree with you in general but the idea is that the logic and relationships that each operator would conclude should be based on the value. We could certainly make this more strict and only define explicitly supported types. Then extended the list as necessary.
If no agreement can be made I am open to any reasonable signal.
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 agree that tying the install type to a platform doesn't make sense. The idea is to completely platform agnostic as the install type is not related to the platform it is performed on the platform. That was my intention in making the key at root level.
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.
If you have a better name I am open to change.
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'm most interested in clarity of semantics. Possible values, what they mean on their own, what they mean with respect to platform types.
For example, based on what I understand so far, here's a try:
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.
Maybe it needs to be even more specific in terms of the machine pools. Isn't the requirement for there to be a single
masterpool with 3 replicas and an emptyworkerpool? This should be unambiguous.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.
why? we let the user choose how many workers he adds - among all the discovered hardware, we auto-select 3 masters and all the rest become workers
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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 point. Is the absence of the dedicated bootstrap node the substantive difference? Again, we should figure out how to define it
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
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.
Worker pools are not assumed but unlike compact clusters workers are possible. @romfreiman keep me honest here.