-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 165
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
Allow static cpu manager policy to be enabled on nodepools #2446
Conversation
@@ -69,6 +69,8 @@ clusters: | |||
profile: ${WORKER_PROFILE}-splitaz | |||
min_size: 3 | |||
max_size: 21 | |||
config_items: | |||
cpu_manager_policy: static | |||
- discount_strategy: spot_max_price | |||
instance_types: ["m4.large", "m5.large", "m5.xlarge", "m4.xlarge"] |
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.
Does it mean that the cpu_manager_policy can be set only in the node pools with these type of instances?
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.
No, those are just our end to end tests where we create nodepools.
41b05d0
to
9e7a63c
Compare
👍 |
@@ -69,6 +69,8 @@ clusters: | |||
profile: ${WORKER_PROFILE}-splitaz | |||
min_size: 3 | |||
max_size: 21 | |||
config_items: | |||
cpu_manager_policy: static |
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.
wrong name: cpu_manager_policy != cpu_management_policy
@@ -52,6 +52,9 @@ write_files: | |||
featureGates: | |||
SupportPodPidsLimit: true | |||
podPidsLimit: {{ .NodePool.ConfigItems.pod_max_pids }} | |||
{{- end }} | |||
{{- if eq .NodePool.ConfigItems.cpu_management_policy "static" }} |
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.
Are there more resonable options? If yes it would make sense to do:
{{- if ... }}
cpuManagerPolicy: {{ .NodePool.ConfigItems.cpu_management_policy }}
{{- end }}
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.
Or even drop the if
if you have a default.
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.
There's only none
and static
, but it might make sense to just drop the if since we are going to roll the nodes for v1.14 anyway, so the if doesn't provide so much in this case :)
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 have dropped the if
and used the same keyword everywhere.
9e7a63c
to
5e1a63b
Compare
Signed-off-by: Arjun Naik <[email protected]>
5e1a63b
to
9fd5a1a
Compare
👍 |
1 similar comment
👍 |
The
static
CPU management policies allow entire CPUs to be allocated to pods which might be useful for workloads which benefit from CPU affinity. Thestatic
policy is only enabled when the config item is present and static to the valuestatic
.