You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
#3645 introduces the 3rd podWatcher based control loop in skaffold with the exact same control flow.
I would think a single podWatcher would be less resource intensive (the same "event messages" only need to be sent once for skaffold) on the API server side and on the skaffold side as well (less go routines).
I think, in a separate PR we should refactor first to a "visitor" pattern on a centralized podWatcher and make the logs, portforwards and debug listeners "register" / "unregister" with the podWatcher.
In this visitor framework the implementation of the debug listener only would require line 94-99.
I don't think this is an issue anymore. we do share one instance of a pod watcher now - there is one PodSelector per Runner instance which is passed to all sub components. the control loop logic (e.g. the calls to watcher.Select(pod)) needs to happen on a per-component basis, so I think we've done as much optimization as we can on this front.
#3645 introduces the 3rd podWatcher based control loop in skaffold with the exact same control flow.
I would think a single podWatcher would be less resource intensive (the same "event messages" only need to be sent once for skaffold) on the API server side and on the skaffold side as well (less go routines).
I think, in a separate PR we should refactor first to a "visitor" pattern on a centralized podWatcher and make the logs, portforwards and debug listeners "register" / "unregister" with the podWatcher.
In this visitor framework the implementation of the debug listener only would require line 94-99.
Originally posted by @balopat in #3645
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: