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

Update CI dependencies #141

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 23, 2022
Merged

Update CI dependencies #141

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 23, 2022

Conversation

muvaf
Copy link
Member

@muvaf muvaf commented Sep 22, 2022

Description of your changes

This will let provider-helm cap the wait time in error cases to 1 minute.

I have:

  • Read and followed Crossplane's contribution process.
  • Run make reviewable to ensure this PR is ready for review.

How has this code been tested

Manually.

@muvaf muvaf requested review from ytsarev and turkenh September 22, 2022 18:12
@bobh66
Copy link
Contributor

bobh66 commented Sep 22, 2022

I think #131 has similar changes

@muvaf
Copy link
Member Author

muvaf commented Sep 22, 2022

@bobh66 Oh sorry, I didn't notice the other PR. I'd be happy to merge yours if you can incorporate the few additional things this PR does.

@bobh66
Copy link
Contributor

bobh66 commented Sep 22, 2022

@muvaf - Sure, that's fine - I'll compare them tonight and add the deltas into 131. Thanks!

@muvaf
Copy link
Member Author

muvaf commented Sep 23, 2022

@bobh66 Actually, I'll merge your PR and then rebase this on top of your changes. Does that sound good?

@bobh66
Copy link
Contributor

bobh66 commented Sep 23, 2022

@muvaf - that's sounds good - I compared the two PRs and other than the workflow updates I think they are essentially the same. Thanks!

@muvaf muvaf changed the title Update crossplane-runtime to get rate limiter Update CI dependencies Sep 23, 2022
Signed-off-by: Muvaffak Onus <me@muvaf.com>
@muvaf
Copy link
Member Author

muvaf commented Sep 23, 2022

@turkenh ready to go.

Copy link
Collaborator

@turkenh turkenh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks!

@turkenh turkenh merged commit 6a8c573 into master Sep 23, 2022
@@ -83,7 +87,7 @@ func main() {
kingpin.FatalIfError(apis.AddToScheme(mgr.GetScheme()), "Cannot add Helm APIs to scheme")
o := controller.Options{
Logger: log,
MaxConcurrentReconciles: *maxReconcileRate,
MaxConcurrentReconciles: maxConcurrency,
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just curious - why hardcode this instead of using the value from the --max-reconcile-rate input parameter?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Max reconciliation rate caps the number of reconciliation that's allowed to happen at a given time, like 10 per second, whereas max concurrent reconciles controls how many reconciliations can be actively running in parallel at the same time, i.e. don't process new events if there are 10 other go routines processing reconciles. So, we can have another argument to control that but using the same argument for both is sort of misleading and the original number was 10, so I kept it same.

@muvaf muvaf deleted the see-me-more branch September 24, 2022 21:55
@bobh66
Copy link
Contributor

bobh66 commented Sep 24, 2022

Thanks @muvaf - I thought that was strange but that's how provider-template was done so I assumed there was a reason for it.

So concurrency is max number of running go routines, and reconciliation rate is max number of outstanding API calls to the server allowed by the RateLimiter? Is it possible for a goroutine to have more than one API call outstanding at any one time? I'm just wondering why they were tied together initially. If the concurrency value is a de-facto limit on the number of outstanding API calls then it makes sense to use the same number for both. But if it's possible to have more outstanding API calls than goroutines, it would be better to separate them. Thanks!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants