Open kaiohenricunha opened 7 months ago
My 2 cents is that there is no one-size-fit-all quota design. If an ElasticQuota needs to support cross-namespace sharing, there are more areas need to be considered:
If you have a through design and can make it backwards-compatible, I'm happy to review to discuss the next steps.
My 2 cents is that there is no one-size-fit-all quota design. If an ElasticQuota needs to support cross-namespace sharing, there are more areas need to be considered:
semantics of selector (label selector or regex or mix, etc.)
how to deal with overlapping selectors
how it impacts preemption
...
If you have a through design and can make it backwards-compatible, I'm happy to review to discuss the next steps.
Thanks for the ideas. I'll see if I can work on that and submit a PR. Could be an interesting use case.
My 2 cents is that there is no one-size-fit-all quota design. If an ElasticQuota needs to support cross-namespace sharing, there are more areas need to be considered:
- semantics of selector (label selector or regex or mix, etc.)
- how to deal with overlapping selectors
- how it impacts preemption
- ...
If you have a through design and can make it backwards-compatible, I'm happy to review to discuss the next steps.
Thanks for the ideas. I'll see if I can work on that and submit a PR. Could be an interesting use case.
Hi, may I ask if you are working on it? Maybe a new queue based plugin can be introduced.
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
lifecycle/stale
is appliedlifecycle/stale
was applied, lifecycle/rotten
is appliedlifecycle/rotten
was applied, the issue is closedYou can:
/remove-lifecycle stale
/close
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle stale
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues.
This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:
lifecycle/stale
is appliedlifecycle/stale
was applied, lifecycle/rotten
is appliedlifecycle/rotten
was applied, the issue is closedYou can:
/remove-lifecycle rotten
/close
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.
/lifecycle rotten
Area
Other components
No response
What happened?
The current design of the capacity scheduler for elastic quotas doesn't fit a multi-tenant scenario, if I understand it correctly.
If I have the following namespaces:
acme-dev-us-west-2-webhook acme-dev-us-west-2-kube-janitor apple-dev-us-west-2-webhook
It would be great if we could configure the "acme" tenant resources to be shared only among namespaces starting with "acme".
What did you expect to happen?
Tenant's resources not shared with other tenants
How can we reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible)?
No response
Anything else we need to know?
No response
Kubernetes version
1.28
Scheduler Plugins version
Latest