Convert both namespace and limitrange examples to v1beta3 #5050
Conversation
dchen1107
changed the title
| restartPolicy: | ||
| always: {} | ||
| volumes: null | ||
| status: {} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Remove unnecessary fields, like status.
|
Manually redo the conversion now since the tool not just generates default fields, but also convert json to yaml. |
dchen1107
force-pushed
the
cleanup
branch
2 times, most recently
from
287ef70 to
50a04d7
Compare
|
|
||
| It does this by providing the following: | ||
|
|
||
| 1. A scope for [Names](../../docs/identifiers.md). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you need one more level of ../
|
Ok, done it. PATL? |
|
I would like to try the LimitRange changes tomorrow to be sure that units are still right. I thought units changed between beta1 and beta3. Sent from my iPhone
|
| "image": "kubernetes/serve_hostname", | ||
| "resources": { | ||
| "limits": { | ||
| "cpu": 1000, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should be "1" (must be a string and is in cores, not millicores).
dchen1107
force-pushed
the
cleanup
branch
3 times, most recently
from
3efd9b5 to
d8f7c9f
Compare
|
Fixed units issue, and run all example against v1beta3. Everything looks fine except invalid_pod is not rejected, and I believe because we don't enable mission control by default yet. $ cluster/kubectl.sh --api-version=v1beta3 create -f examples/limitrange/v1beta3/valid-pod.json $ cluster/kubectl.sh --api-version=v1beta3 get pods valid-pod |
| "image": "kubernetes/serve_hostname", | ||
| "resources": { | ||
| "limits": { | ||
| "cpu": 1, |
|
Reassigning to @derekwaynecarr for final review. |
|
Addressed all comments. Surprisingly when I tested it against v1beta3 apiserver, all errors are not detected by validation code. :-( PTAL |
|
It would be rejected when it's enabled which I will do for all salt providers hopefully tomorrow. Sent from my iPhone
|
|
I tested the limit range scenario on a server with the admission control checks in place and invalid-pod is properly rejected and valid-pod is properly accepted. LGTM. |
Convert both namespace and limitrange examples to v1beta3
|
@derekwaynecarr Did you ever think about enable that module by default? It won't have any impact if there is no limits object created anyway, right? :-) |
|
@dchen1107 - I am literally doing that right now for all the salt based providers in a PR I am testing on GCE now ;-) When #4749 merges, it has no substantive perf impact to not always have on across all providers. |
|
Good to know that. Thanks! |
changes: 1) apiVersion 2) replace id with name