docs: clarify DaemonSet overhead is used for sizing, not reserved - #9442
Open
vincentcreusot wants to merge 2 commits into
Open
docs: clarify DaemonSet overhead is used for sizing, not reserved#9442vincentcreusot wants to merge 2 commits into
vincentcreusot wants to merge 2 commits into
Conversation
vincentcreusot
marked this pull request as ready for review
July 25, 2026 17:20
vincentcreusot
force-pushed
the
docs/9269-daemonset-overhead-not-reserved
branch
from
July 31, 2026 14:00
a99e6f6 to
1598bb6
Compare
ryan-mist
reviewed
Aug 21, 2026
ryan-mist
left a comment
ryan-mist
left a comment
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for opening this one! Just had a few minor comments
| pods itself. | ||
|
|
||
| {{% alert title="Note" color="primary" %}} | ||
| To guarantee DaemonSets get their capacity, give them a |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure if using PriorityClass is an absolute guarantee. IIUC it enables reclaiming capacity for the DS pods, but doesn't guarantee it because of PDBs, equal priority classes, etc.
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That seems fair, it's not an absolute guarantee. Modified the wording.
| that capacity on the node after it joins the cluster, and it does not bind | ||
| pods itself. | ||
|
|
||
| {{% alert title="Note" color="primary" %}} |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should also add startup taints as an option
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That makes sense I am adding as an option.
vincentcreusot
force-pushed
the
docs/9269-daemonset-overhead-not-reserved
branch
from
August 23, 2026 23:59
1598bb6 to
4b3e59c
Compare
Author
|
Thank you for your review @ryan-mist. Took your comment into account and provided more details. Please review changes when you get time. |
vincentcreusot
force-pushed
the
docs/9269-daemonset-overhead-not-reserved
branch
3 times, most recently
from
August 27, 2026 03:57
25e7d82 to
e88861a
Compare
Signed-off-by: Vincent Creusot <vincent.creusot@gmail.com>
Soften the PriorityClass guidance, which is best-effort rather than a guarantee, and add startup taints as the other option for keeping workload pods off a node until DaemonSets are ready. Also reflow the section to the one-sentence-per-line style used throughout scheduling.md. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Vincent Creusot <vincent.creusot@gmail.com>
vincentcreusot
force-pushed
the
docs/9269-daemonset-overhead-not-reserved
branch
from
August 28, 2026 03:54
e88861a to
f66ca30
Compare
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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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.
Signed-off-by: Vincent Creusot vincent.creusot@gmail.com
Fixes #9269
Description
Added a small paragraph explaining that Karpenter only uses the Daemonset overhead to size the nodes and do not reserve the space
How was this change tested?
Checked on preview
Does this change impact docs?
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.