[LFXV2-1166] Add pod disruption budget support by bramwelt · Pull Request #59 · linuxfoundation/lfx-v2-committee-service

bramwelt · 2026-03-06T18:44:19Z

Summary

Add podDisruptionBudget values to Helm chart (disabled by default)
Create PodDisruptionBudget template supporting minAvailable and maxUnavailable

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Issue: LFXV2-1166 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Trevor Bramwell <tbramwell@linuxfoundation.org>

coderabbitai · 2026-03-06T18:44:43Z

Walkthrough

A new Helm template for Kubernetes PodDisruptionBudget resources is added to the lfx-v2-committee-service chart. The template includes validation to prevent simultaneous configuration of both minAvailable and maxUnavailable parameters. Configuration values are introduced with the feature disabled by default, allowing operators to enable and configure disruption budgets as needed.

Changes

Cohort / File(s)	Summary
PodDisruptionBudget Template `charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/templates/pdb.yaml`	New Helm template for Kubernetes PodDisruptionBudget with metadata configuration, label selectors, and validation logic to prevent conflicting minAvailable/maxUnavailable settings.
Helm Values Configuration `charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/values.yaml`	Added podDisruptionBudget section with enabled flag (default: false), optional minAvailable and maxUnavailable parameters, and guideline documentation.

Estimated code review effort

🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~10 minutes

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 3

✅ Passed checks (3 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Title check	✅ Passed	The title 'LFXV2-1166 Add pod disruption budget support' is directly related to the changeset, which adds PodDisruptionBudget support via new template and values configuration.
Description check	✅ Passed	The description accurately describes the changeset: adding podDisruptionBudget values (disabled by default) and creating a PDB template supporting minAvailable and maxUnavailable options.
Docstring Coverage	✅ Passed	No functions found in the changed files to evaluate docstring coverage. Skipping docstring coverage check.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Post copyable unit tests in a comment
Commit unit tests in branch tbramwell/LFXV2-1166-pod-disruption-budget

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

Copilot

Pull request overview

Adds optional PodDisruptionBudget (PDB) support to the lfx-v2-committee-service Helm chart so operators can configure disruption limits via chart values.

Changes:

Introduces podDisruptionBudget configuration in values.yaml (disabled by default).
Adds a PodDisruptionBudget manifest template supporting minAvailable and maxUnavailable.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 3 comments.

File	Description
`charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/values.yaml`	Adds new `podDisruptionBudget` values block for configuring PDB behavior.
`charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/templates/pdb.yaml`	Adds a conditional PDB template rendered when the feature is enabled.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

Copilot · 2026-03-06T18:47:18Z

charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/templates/pdb.yaml

+  {{- with .Values.podDisruptionBudget.minAvailable }}
+  minAvailable: {{ . }}
+  {{- end }}
+  {{- with .Values.podDisruptionBudget.maxUnavailable }}
+  maxUnavailable: {{ . }}
+  {{- end }}


The {{- with ... }} blocks under spec: trim the preceding newline, which can concatenate app: {{ .Chart.Name }} with minAvailable/maxUnavailable and render invalid YAML. Use non-trimming actions here (e.g., {{ with ... }} / {{ end }}) or otherwise ensure a newline is preserved before emitting these fields.

Suggested change

{{- with .Values.podDisruptionBudget.minAvailable }}

minAvailable: {{ . }}

{{- end }}

{{- with .Values.podDisruptionBudget.maxUnavailable }}

maxUnavailable: {{ . }}

{{- end }}

{{ with .Values.podDisruptionBudget.minAvailable }}

minAvailable: {{ . }}

{{ end }}

{{ with .Values.podDisruptionBudget.maxUnavailable }}

maxUnavailable: {{ . }}

{{ end }}

Copilot · 2026-03-06T18:47:18Z

charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/templates/pdb.yaml

+{{- if .Values.podDisruptionBudget.enabled }}
+---
+apiVersion: policy/v1
+kind: PodDisruptionBudget
+metadata:
+  name: {{ .Chart.Name }}
+  namespace: {{ .Release.Namespace }}
+spec:
+  selector:
+    matchLabels:
+      app: {{ .Chart.Name }}
+  {{- with .Values.podDisruptionBudget.minAvailable }}
+  minAvailable: {{ . }}
+  {{- end }}
+  {{- with .Values.podDisruptionBudget.maxUnavailable }}
+  maxUnavailable: {{ . }}
+  {{- end }}


When podDisruptionBudget.enabled is true, this template can render an invalid PDB if neither minAvailable nor maxUnavailable is set, and it can also render an invalid PDB if both are set. Add Helm-time validation (e.g., fail/required) to enforce that exactly one of these values is provided when enabled.

Copilot · 2026-03-06T18:47:18Z

charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/values.yaml

+  # minAvailable: 1
+  # maxUnavailable: 1


The values docs currently suggest both minAvailable and maxUnavailable can be configured, but PodDisruptionBudget requires exactly one of them. Consider updating these comments to indicate they are mutually exclusive and that one must be set when podDisruptionBudget.enabled=true.

Suggested change

# minAvailable: 1

# maxUnavailable: 1

# minAvailable: 1 # Specify exactly one of minAvailable or maxUnavailable when enabled=true

# maxUnavailable: 1 # Mutually exclusive with minAvailable; uncomment only one of these fields

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Issue: LFXV2-1166 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Trevor Bramwell <tbramwell@linuxfoundation.org>

asithade

LGTM

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Issue: LFXV2-1166 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Trevor Bramwell <tbramwell@linuxfoundation.org>

coderabbitai

Actionable comments posted: 1

🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed.

Inline comments:
In `@charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/templates/pdb.yaml`:
- Around line 17-22: The PDB template can render an invalid empty spec when
.Values.podDisruptionBudget.enabled is true but neither
.Values.podDisruptionBudget.minAvailable nor
.Values.podDisruptionBudget.maxUnavailable is set; fix it by adding a
guard/validation that checks hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "minAvailable"
or hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "maxUnavailable" (or both) before
rendering the spec, and if both are missing call fail with a clear message
(e.g., using Helm's fail function) so the chart errors out instead of producing
an invalid PDB; update the conditional logic around the spec generation that
currently uses hasKey checks for minAvailable/maxUnavailable to enforce this
combined requirement.

ℹ️ Review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: Organization UI

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: 7e573b12-f6b3-47b5-8e4a-3263713425f2

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 6d8d941 and de43823.

📒 Files selected for processing (2)

charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/templates/pdb.yaml
charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/values.yaml

coderabbitai · 2026-03-06T20:38:16Z

charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/templates/pdb.yaml

+  {{- if hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "minAvailable" }}
+  minAvailable: {{ .Values.podDisruptionBudget.minAvailable }}
+  {{- end }}
+  {{- if hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "maxUnavailable" }}
+  maxUnavailable: {{ .Values.podDisruptionBudget.maxUnavailable }}
+  {{- end }}


⚠️ Potential issue | 🟠 Major

Missing validation: PDB requires at least one of minAvailable or maxUnavailable.

When podDisruptionBudget.enabled is true but neither minAvailable nor maxUnavailable is set, this template renders a PDB without a disruption budget spec, which is invalid. Kubernetes requires at least one of these fields.

🐛 Proposed fix to add validation

Add this validation after line 6:

{{- if and (hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "minAvailable") (hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "maxUnavailable") }} {{- fail "podDisruptionBudget: cannot set both minAvailable and maxUnavailable" }} {{- end }} +{{- if not (or (hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "minAvailable") (hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "maxUnavailable")) }} + {{- fail "podDisruptionBudget: must set either minAvailable or maxUnavailable when enabled" }} +{{- end }} ---

🤖 Prompt for AI Agents

Verify each finding against the current code and only fix it if needed. In `@charts/lfx-v2-committee-service/templates/pdb.yaml` around lines 17 - 22, The PDB template can render an invalid empty spec when .Values.podDisruptionBudget.enabled is true but neither .Values.podDisruptionBudget.minAvailable nor .Values.podDisruptionBudget.maxUnavailable is set; fix it by adding a guard/validation that checks hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "minAvailable" or hasKey .Values.podDisruptionBudget "maxUnavailable" (or both) before rendering the spec, and if both are missing call fail with a clear message (e.g., using Helm's fail function) so the chart errors out instead of producing an invalid PDB; update the conditional logic around the spec generation that currently uses hasKey checks for minAvailable/maxUnavailable to enforce this combined requirement.

Add pod disruption budget support

e6ebd7f

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Issue: LFXV2-1166 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Trevor Bramwell <tbramwell@linuxfoundation.org>

bramwelt requested a review from a team as a code owner March 6, 2026 18:44

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings March 6, 2026 18:44

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of bramwelt March 6, 2026 18:44 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Add PDB validation and zero-value support

d70a012

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Issue: LFXV2-1166 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Trevor Bramwell <tbramwell@linuxfoundation.org>

asithade previously approved these changes Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge main into PDB branch

de43823

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) Issue: LFXV2-1166 Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 <noreply@anthropic.com> Signed-off-by: Trevor Bramwell <tbramwell@linuxfoundation.org>

bramwelt dismissed asithade’s stale review via de43823 March 6, 2026 20:35

coderabbitai bot reviewed Mar 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[LFXV2-1166] Add pod disruption budget support#59

[LFXV2-1166] Add pod disruption budget support#59
bramwelt wants to merge 3 commits intomainfrom
tbramwell/LFXV2-1166-pod-disruption-budget

bramwelt commented Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 6, 2026 •

edited by atlassian bot

Loading

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

asithade left a comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot Mar 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

Conversation

bramwelt commented Mar 6, 2026

Summary

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 6, 2026 • edited by atlassian bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Walkthrough

Changes

Estimated code review effort

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

asithade left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

coderabbitai bot Mar 6, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

3 participants

coderabbitai bot commented Mar 6, 2026 •

edited by atlassian bot

Loading