Update KEP with DeleteOnScaledownOnly policy #2545
Conversation
|
@mattcary: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: sebgl. Note that only kubernetes members, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
cncf-cla: yes
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
kind/kep
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mattcary 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 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
sig/apps
mattcary
force-pushed
the
multidel
branch
2 times, most recently
from
623768a to
75cce4b
Compare
| On a scale down followed by a scale up, will wait until the old PVC for the removed Pod is deleted and ensure | ||
| that the PVC used is a freshly created one. This policy also implies the | ||
| former, that is, PVCs will also be deleted when the StatefulSet is deleted. | ||
| * `DeleteOnStatefulSetDeletion` - PVCs corresponding to the StatefulSet are deleted |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should this option also have an "Only" suffix?
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
/lgtm Thanks! |
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
lgtm
|
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
| when StatefulSet themselves get deleted. When Pods are deleted as part of a scale | ||
| down, PVCs are not deleted. Thus there may be PVCs owned by the StatefulSet that | ||
| are not attached to a Pod. | ||
| * `DeleteOnScaledownOnly` - When a pod is deleted on scale down, the corresponding PVC |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
👍 I like the new names, much more explicit.
|
/cc @kk-src |
|
@mattcary: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: kk-src. Note that only kubernetes members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs. In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
|
/close After API review we've gone a slightly different direction, see #2652. |
Here is the change proposed from the comments in #2440.
Note that I implemented this as an extra policy enum rather than a list as @msau42 suggested. After looking at it, the list didn't really buy much because there would have to be validation to avoid combining "Retain" with any of the other policies. Since we're just adding one more policy that seems easier than the overhead and additional user errors/friction of validating the list. Maybe I missed something, though, LMK.
/assign @msau42
/assign @sebgl
/assign @wojtek-t