interface: define the placement affinity apis #316
Conversation
zhiying-lin
force-pushed
the
affinity-api
branch
from
b0fb0bf to
7134226
Compare
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 📢 Thoughts on this report? Let us know! |
| // When there are multiple elements, the lists of clusters corresponding to each | ||
| // placementAffinityTerm are intersected, i.e. all terms must be satisfied. | ||
| // +kubebuilder:validation:Optional | ||
| RequiredDuringSchedulingIgnoredDuringExecution []PlacementAffinityTerm `json:"requiredDuringSchedulingIgnoredDuringExecution,omitempty"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
what happens when the related placement changed its schedule policy, say from picking "env:staging" to "env:prod"?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
// If the affinity requirements specified by this field cease to be met
// at some point during placement execution (e.g. due to a placement label update), the
// system won't evict the placement from its cluster.
It will be ignored during execution.
We expect the customers to manage the dependencies during execution. more details could be found in my draft.
| // +kubebuilder:validation:Enum=Cluster;Namespaced | ||
| // It defaults to the same scope of the current placement. | ||
| // +kubebuilder:validation:Optional | ||
| AffinityScope ResourceScope `json:"affinityScope,omitempty"` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
you mean, affinity with CRP and RP? it could be, the PlacementAffinityTerm is an array.
line 287
// When there are multiple elements, the lists of clusters corresponding to each
// placementAffinityTerm are intersected, i.e. all terms must be satisfied.
2 participants
Description of your changes
Fixes #
I have:
make reviewableto ensure this PR is ready for review.How has this code been tested
Special notes for your reviewer