Skip to content

Improve canary deployment description #50231

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

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

xavierbaude
Copy link

Description

Currently the canary description is incomplete in the deployment page. I suggest this brief of different progressive solutions.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Mar 25, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @xavierbaude!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/website 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/website has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the language/en Issues or PRs related to English language label Mar 25, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign dipesh-rawat for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found 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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Mar 25, 2025
Copy link

netlify bot commented Mar 25, 2025

Pull request preview available for checking

Built without sensitive environment variables

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 11e4032
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-main-staging/deploys/67ee849dd5f5ba00083e9fc5
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-50231--kubernetes-io-main-staging.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

Copy link
Contributor

@sftim sftim left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for the PR, but it's as it stands it doesn't improve the documentation. You should carefully check what you want this page to say and make sure that your changes align to that vision.

[managing resources](/docs/concepts/workloads/management/#canary-deployments).
The progressive delivery is a approach that allow different strategies in the rollout process. There are different approaches where the principals are: canary deployment, blue-green and A/B testing.

* The canary deployment is the default pattern in Kubernetes, it is the equivalent of `.spec.strategy.type==RollingUpdate`. It's the deployment of a portion of pods that ensure the application is stil available. You can make advanced canary by using different deployments and services as described in [managing resources](/docs/concepts/workloads/management/#canary-deployments).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is not the same as how the CNCF describe it. RollingUpdate is usually not a canary deployment because RollingUpdate lacks the gradual element where the rate of change is intentionally limited.

See https://glossary.cncf.io/canary-deployment/

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I may complete the description of the canary deployment. The gradual deployment can be achieve by using 2 options : .spec.strategy.rollingUpdate.maxUnavailable and .spec.strategy.rollingUpdate.maxSurge and the readiness probe ensure that the pod is ready to get traffic. The gradual element is the number of pod and maybe I can precise that it requires more than one pod.

For me the traffic shift is not the mandatory way to balance user to both version (stable and canary). External tool can bring advanced management rollout like flagger or argo rollout.

What is your opinion?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi (I was previously @sftim).

My opinion is still that Kubernetes does not default to canary rollouts, and that a rolling update is different from an actual canary rollout.

Canary deployments gradually move traffic, allowing for early aborts if there are problems, whereas RollingUpdate goes as quickly as it can given current constraints.

Co-authored-by: Kundan Kumar <[email protected]>
@xavierbaude xavierbaude requested a review from sftim April 3, 2025 12:55
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. language/en Issues or PRs related to English language size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants