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

Deprecate CronJob deployment approach #1340

Open
knelasevero opened this issue Jan 16, 2024 · 8 comments
Open

Deprecate CronJob deployment approach #1340

knelasevero opened this issue Jan 16, 2024 · 8 comments
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.

Comments

@knelasevero
Copy link
Contributor

knelasevero commented Jan 16, 2024

This came up during community meeting of Jan 16 2024. Since there are some proposals to change descheduler to more of a controller than it is right now, with long running implications, maybe supporting the CronJob deployment approach isn't great for us in the future.

One of the reasons why folks use the CronJob approach is to have more control over which time the evictions are performed, as it happens here: #1338

I remember getting questions from people asking the same thing (how to run it only at night). So before deprecating it might also be good to add a feature to better control intervals between loops with a cron like semantics.

@knelasevero knelasevero added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Jan 16, 2024
@pravarag
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @knelasevero , if this approach is being actively considered, I would like to contribute in any way possible. Kindly let me know :)

@knelasevero
Copy link
Contributor Author

First step would be implementing a feature to better control intervals between loops with a cron like semantics I think we are very supportive of it.

@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jun 10, 2024
@ChandonPierre
Copy link

Since there are some proposals to change descheduler to more of a controller than it is right now, with long running implications

Where can I read about these proposals?

I'm very interested in a descheduler controller - Instead of implementing my own, I'd rather work towards a proposed and agreed upon approach

@Deltachaos
Copy link

The downside of a single pod running as a controller is, that descheduler stops if the node where the descheduler runs is going down.

@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Aug 19, 2024
@aslafy-z
Copy link
Contributor

/remove-lifecycle rotten

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. label Aug 19, 2024
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 17, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants