-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 883
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
add a feature-gate for Lazy Reconcile feature #4564
Closed
+5
−0
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains 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
Oops, something went wrong.
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why is there only one global switch? Will you also introduce related fields in PP next?
What I mean is, can the system have both an immediately effective PP and a
Lazy Reconcile
PP at the same time?There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Because if there's only one of two options, then assuming all future defaults are
Lazy Reconcile
, most users would refuse to upgrade due to their lack of experience withLazy Reconcile
.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
+1
lazy
should not be the default behavior.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Lazy is not the default behavior as
PolicyLazyReconcile{Default: false}
What chaunceyjiang mean is that it is better to add a filed to Policy to control the the effect strategy.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
What I mean is: It would be best if these two behaviors could coexist in the karmada.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I still have one question I don't fully understand, which is: if a resource has not changed but the PP has changed, then this resource will continue to use the old PP. If a rescheduling happens at this time, should the scheduler use the old PP or the new PP? If it uses the new PP, then that behavior would be somewhat inconsistent with our expected behavior.
Our expectation is that the new PP would only be applied if the resource itself has changed.