-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4k
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
[cluster-autoscaler] feat: Add equinix metal environment variables and also support older environment variables #6085
[cluster-autoscaler] feat: Add equinix metal environment variables and also support older environment variables #6085
Conversation
d4b42d1
to
8f5d591
Compare
8f5d591
to
272a674
Compare
This is a breaking change - anyone previously using Also - can anyone from the existing /assign |
272a674
to
fd4f265
Compare
@x13n This will not be a breaking change. The fix added in this PR supports backward compatibility with |
@@ -128,51 +136,51 @@ func (pcp *packetCloudProvider) NodeGroupForNode(node *apiv1.Node) (cloudprovide | |||
} | |||
|
|||
// HasInstance returns whether a given node has a corresponding instance in this cloud provider | |||
func (pcp *packetCloudProvider) HasInstance(node *apiv1.Node) (bool, error) { | |||
func (pcp *equinixMetalCloudProvider) HasInstance(node *apiv1.Node) (bool, error) { |
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'm curious what we are missing out on by not implemented these methods where it seems we could easily offer a meaningful lookup:
- HasInstance
- GetAvailableMachineTypes
Also for these methods that seem more important than lookups:
- Refresh
- Cleanup
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.
(and any others that are "NotImplemented" / "not implemented")
@aayushrangwala could you attach some easy to follow repro steps, perhaps a video of the walkthrough. I'd like to see that:
|
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.
Thanks, the changes outside of packet cloudprovider look good to me. Will approve them after the PR is LGTMed.
7d989c3f-1863-4098-8040-cfa8ce43d780.mp4 |
cluster-autoscaler/cloudprovider/packet/packet_node_group_test.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
@x13n The "Tests / test-and-verify (pull_request)" job is failing over what seems to be package problems. This PR doesn't seem to change any go.mod, nor imports, nor introduce new packages that are not imported, so not sure how this would be related. @aayushrangwala Rebase? |
…ility Signed-off-by: Ayush Rangwala <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ayush Rangwala <[email protected]>
fd4f265
to
950181f
Compare
Yes tried rebasing, still failing. Trying to debug whats the issue |
950181f
to
3a95773
Compare
Signed-off-by: Ayush Rangwala <[email protected]>
3a95773
to
1e4cb18
Compare
/lgtm |
From #6084 (applies here too?)
Is there a particular place where @aayushrangwala should do that? |
Yes, there's a
question in the PR template, please update the first comment by adding an answer there. We're collecting these when releasing a new version. |
@x13n Updated the description to have user-facing change comments |
Thanks! /approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: aayushrangwala, x13n The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
/kind deprecation
What this PR does / why we need it:
As part of an effort to deprecate Packet cloud provider and support equinix metal names, after acquisition. This PR will support a new expected env vars but also support older env vars as usual for backward compatibility.
This is a sequential PR depends on #6084
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #4286
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: