Adding scale up down code for DeploymentController #14209
Conversation
k8s-github-robot
added
the
size/L
|
Labelling this PR as size/L |
nikhiljindal
force-pushed
the
deploymentController
branch
from
bdd5b89 to
13813a7
Compare
|
GCE e2e build/test failed for commit 13813a7640484db8a06f440e006d5c1a8a2435d9. |
|
GCE e2e build/test failed for commit bdd5b89cbb15cec3163fe8ce463cc570354874bb. |
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| func (d *DeploymentController) scaleRC(rc *api.ReplicationController, scale int) (*api.ReplicationController, error) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does "scale" universally mean "increment/decrement" in our terminology? Or does it sometimes mean "set"? E.g. someone might thing scaleRC means set replicas to the scale argument, not increment/decrement.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If it means increment/decrement, leave as is. If it typically means set replicas to count, then I'd recommend renaming to adjustRC.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You are right.
Updated the method to take the newReplica size, rather than just the diff.
|
Most comments are just nits, LGTM to merge. |
nikhiljindal
force-pushed
the
deploymentController
branch
from
13813a7 to
d800fef
Compare
|
Thanks @ghodss |
|
Everything LGTM. I still can't add labels unfortunately but I'll let you know if that changes. |
| return err | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| oldRCs, err := d.getoldRCs(deployment) |
|
GCE e2e build/test passed for commit d800fef81b8db9a77890e717ed1cbb31d2ae7592. |
nikhiljindal
force-pushed
the
deploymentController
branch
from
d800fef to
89e9691
Compare
|
Thanks! Updated code as per comments. |
nikhiljindal
added
the
lgtm
|
Continuous integration appears to have missed, closing and re-opening to trigger it |
|
GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 89e9691. |
|
@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge] |
|
GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 89e9691. |
|
Automatic merge from submit-queue |
Auto commit by PR queue bot
|
Is there going to be a followup PR for availability checking against the scaled up RCs? I have design questions/comments around that aspect. |
|
Nevermind, I can discuss in #14130 |
Ref #1743
Adding code for scaling up down RCs using RollingUpdateStrategy.
Verified manually that it works.
Next steps:
Will send subsequent PRs for the above tasks.