Skip to content

[Fix] Increase resource limits for wait-gcs-ready init container #4705

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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
xiaolin8 wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

[Fix] Increase resource limits for wait-gcs-ready init container #4705

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions ray-operator/controllers/ray/common/pod.go
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -402,8 +402,8 @@ func DefaultWorkerPodTemplate(ctx context.Context, instance rayv1.RayCluster, wo
// The init container's resource consumption remains constant, as it solely sends requests to check the GCS status at a fixed frequency.
// Therefore, hard-coding the resources is acceptable.
Limits: corev1.ResourceList{
corev1.ResourceCPU: resource.MustParse("200m"),
corev1.ResourceMemory: resource.MustParse("256Mi"),
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@andrewsykim andrewsykim Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Does this init container even need to set limits? Only setting requests may be better to reduce chance of OOM without requesting additional resources just for init

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@andrewsykim andrewsykim Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

(removing limits can be considered a breaking change in some scenarios, so let's take that into consideration as well)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@andrewsykim andrewsykim Apr 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

On second thought, we probably want to keep the limits. But changing the limit means the init container QoS is changing from Guarenteed -> Burstable. Do you anticipate any issues with that? https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/pods/pod-qos/#quality-of-service-classes

corev1.ResourceCPU: resource.MustParse("1"),
corev1.ResourceMemory: resource.MustParse("1Gi"),
},
Requests: corev1.ResourceList{
corev1.ResourceCPU: resource.MustParse("200m"),
Expand Down