Skip to content

Commit d6992ce

Browse files
committed
adress review remarks
1 parent 7772213 commit d6992ce

File tree

1 file changed

+6
-12
lines changed
  • keps/sig-apps/4563-eviction-request-api

1 file changed

+6
-12
lines changed

keps/sig-apps/4563-eviction-request-api/README.md

+6-12
Original file line numberDiff line numberDiff line change
@@ -196,13 +196,6 @@ The major issues are:
196196
This can also happen with other mechanism (e.g., different types of evictions). This has been
197197
discussed in the issue [kubernetes/kubernetes#124448](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/124448)
198198
and in the issue [kubernetes/kubernetes#72129](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/72129).
199-
7. [Affinity Based Eviction](https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/4328) is an upcoming
200-
feature that would like to introduce the `RequiredDuringSchedulingRequiredDuringExecution`
201-
nodeAffinity option to remove pods from nodes that do not match this affinity. The controller
202-
proposed by this feature would like to use the EvictionRequest API for the disruption safety and
203-
observability reasons. It can also leave the eviction logic and reconciliation to the eviction
204-
request controller and reducing the maintenance burden. Discussed in the KEP
205-
[kubernetes/enhancements#4329](https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/pull/4329).
206199

207200
This KEP is a prerequisite for the [Declarative Node Maintenance KEP](https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/pull/4213),
208201
which describes other issues and consequences that would be solved by the EvictionRequest API.
@@ -223,7 +216,7 @@ the application supports this.
223216

224217
### PodDisruptionBudget Standing Issues
225218

226-
For completeness here is a complete list of upstream open PDB issues. Most are relevant to this KEP.
219+
For completeness here is a complete list of open PDB issues. Most are relevant to this KEP.
227220

228221
- [Mandatorliy specify how the application handle disruptions in the pod spec.](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/124390)
229222
- [Treat liveness probe-based restarts as voluntary disruptions gated by PodDisruptionBudgets](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/123204)
@@ -240,6 +233,7 @@ For completeness here is a complete list of upstream open PDB issues. Most are r
240233
- [New FailedEviction PodDisruptionCondition](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/128815)
241234
- [Distinguish PDB error separately in eviction API](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/125500)
242235
- [Confusing use of TooManyRequests error for eviction](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/106286)
236+
- [New EvictionBlocked PodDisruptionCondition](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/128815)
243237

244238
### Goals
245239

@@ -1780,10 +1774,10 @@ also not possible to change the default eviction behavior for safety reasons. So
17801774
would not be sufficient, as we need to solve this for all pods.
17811775

17821776
We could track these requests in the PDB object itself. A PDB can track multiple pods with its
1783-
selector. The pods do not have to be from the same application, even though they usually are. These
1784-
pods may run in various locations and may have various reasons for their disruption. It would be
1785-
difficult to synchronize the PDB object for applications with a large number of pods. This could
1786-
result in inconsistent updates and conflicts as many components would race for the PDB updates.
1777+
selector. These pods may run in various locations and may have various reasons for their disruption.
1778+
It would be difficult to synchronize the PDB object for applications with a large number of pods.
1779+
This could result in inconsistent updates and conflicts as many components would race for the PDB
1780+
updates.
17871781

17881782
The updates to the PDB could be done solely by the eviction endpoint, but this is disqualified
17891783
because many components override this endpoint with validating admission webhooks. And so we would

0 commit comments

Comments
 (0)