-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
MachinePool.Spec.ProviderIDList may not scale well #6387
Comments
/milestone v1.2 |
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle stale |
/lifecycle frozen |
/triage accepted |
@fabriziopandini: GuidelinesPlease ensure that the issue body includes answers to the following questions:
For more details on the requirements of such an issue, please see here and ensure that they are met. If this request no longer meets these requirements, the label can be removed In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
This issue has not been updated in over 1 year, and should be re-triaged. You can:
For more details on the triage process, see https://www.kubernetes.dev/docs/guide/issue-triage/ /remove-triage accepted |
/priority important-longterm |
@mboersma @willie-yao @Jont828 to re-asses this issue and check if this is in the critical path for MP graduation |
kind ping |
I think this is still a potential issue, but we still need to do some testing to see if it's a real-world limitation. I am doing some large cluster testing currently in Azure and I'll try to orient that toward MachinePools and see if I can collect any useful data. Thanks for the nudge @fabriziopandini! |
/triage accepted |
What steps did you take and what happened:
In working on the MachinePool Machines proposal in #6088, we collectively rejected the idea of attaching an
infrastructureRefsList
to each MachinePool spec.While this would be convenient, the overall size of a MachinePool could become large if the number of replicas / instances grows. Its representation is transferred over the network and stored in etcd. It's easy to imagine a long list of structs causing performance problems with a thousand-node cluster, for example. (No, we didn't test this, we are simply anticipating a possible problem.)
Similarly, the existing
ProviderIDList
on a MachinePool spec could become large in a large cluster. See this comment.We should investigate if a large
ProviderIDList
actually causes problems–maybe this could be tested with DockerMachinePool? It might also be possible to deprecate use ofProviderIDList
after #6088 has been implemented.What did you expect to happen:
Anything else you would like to add:
Environment:
kubectl version
):/etc/os-release
):/kind bug
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: