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

Refactor ScaleDownSet processor into a composite processor #6103

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 13, 2023

Conversation

kawych
Copy link
Contributor

@kawych kawych commented Sep 11, 2023

What type of PR is this?

What this PR does / why we need it:

Split ScaleDownSet processor into two processors doing their individual tasks. This allows more flexibility when overriding these processors, such as adding another targeted processor to the pipeline, or removing one of the processors if it's not needed.

Special notes for your reviewer:

CC @towca

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 11, 2023
@towca
Copy link
Collaborator

towca commented Sep 13, 2023

/lgtm
/approve

Thanks for making the change!

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Sep 13, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kawych, towca

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 13, 2023
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 72f8a3b into kubernetes:master Sep 13, 2023
@@ -178,7 +178,10 @@ func NewTestProcessors(context *context.AutoscalingContext) *processors.Autoscal
NodeGroupListProcessor: &nodegroups.NoOpNodeGroupListProcessor{},
BinpackingLimiter: binpacking.NewDefaultBinpackingLimiter(),
NodeGroupSetProcessor: nodegroupset.NewDefaultNodeGroupSetProcessor([]string{}, config.NodeGroupDifferenceRatios{}),
ScaleDownSetProcessor: nodes.NewPostFilteringScaleDownNodeProcessor(),
ScaleDownSetProcessor: nodes.NewCompositeScaleDownSetProcessor([]nodes.ScaleDownSetProcessor{
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oops, missed this: why is the order different for test processors? Was this intended? I think we always want to call the max nodes one first so that we avoid breaking the atomic property (could be worth capturing that in a comment somewhere btw)?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/cluster-autoscaler cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants