Skip to content
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

[RECOMMENDED] introduce actualReplicas & desiredReplicas #71

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 23, 2021

Conversation

dprotaso
Copy link
Member

requirement levels for these are RECOMMENDED

it allows for distributions to signal some additional status regarding
the scale of their revisions

@google-cla google-cla bot added the cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CLA. label Sep 15, 2021
@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Sep 15, 2021
@dprotaso
Copy link
Member Author

cc @knative/trademark-committee

@dprotaso dprotaso changed the title introduce actualReplicas & desiredReplicas [RECOMMENDED] introduce actualReplicas & desiredReplicas Sep 15, 2021
@omerbensaadon omerbensaadon added the needs-TMC-review Needs review by members of the TMC label Sep 16, 2021
</td>
<td>int
</td>
<td>Reflects the number of replicas that are running this revision.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

do we need to be clear about whether this is "ready" replicas vs "existing" replicas in any state?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think the word Ready would have meaning here without more definition. That's why I left the verbiage as running this revision

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

What was the original reason for adding these? I have a vague recollection that we added it so that we didn't rely on the Deployment's metadata to maintain Knative's desired state of the world - and then we'd reflect that down into the Deployment. So, I guess if that's all it is and there's no assumption as to state of the underlying "pods" (rather it's just implying that we're "trying" to bring up X of them), is this your thinking too?

@omerbensaadon
Copy link

+1

@duglin
Copy link
Contributor

duglin commented Sep 23, 2021

rebase needed

@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 23, 2021
@spencerdillard
Copy link
Contributor

Should the actual/desired replica count be tied to the ContainerStatus? IOW should we be extending ContainerStatus with this count or the Revision? Basically, do we need to account for mixed containers running?

@duglin
Copy link
Contributor

duglin commented Sep 23, 2021

/lgtm

@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 23, 2021
@spencerdillard
Copy link
Contributor

Discussed why we can't do this in the ContainerStatus property in KTC and it makes sense that this change is a view into the autoscaler vs a view into the pod-level tracking of containers, so will lgtm

@spencerdillard
Copy link
Contributor

/LGTM

@omerbensaadon
Copy link

/approve

@omerbensaadon omerbensaadon added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 23, 2021
@knative-prow-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

Approval requirements bypassed by manually added approval.

This pull-request has been approved by: dprotaso, omerbensaadon

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

requirement levels for these are RECOMMENDED

it allows for distributions to signal some additional status regarding
the scale of their revisions
@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot removed lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels Sep 23, 2021
@omerbensaadon
Copy link

/lgtm

@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 23, 2021
@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot merged commit 2b0f654 into knative:main Sep 23, 2021
@dprotaso dprotaso deleted the replica-count branch September 23, 2021 19:33
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CLA. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-TMC-review Needs review by members of the TMC size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants