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

[Feature] Defragmentor of backup-restore should also consider the etcd db size along with scheduled defrag #556

Open
ishan16696 opened this issue Nov 11, 2022 · 2 comments
Labels
kind/enhancement Enhancement, improvement, extension lifecycle/rotten Nobody worked on this for 12 months (final aging stage) priority/2 Priority (lower number equals higher priority)

Comments

@ishan16696
Copy link
Member

ishan16696 commented Nov 11, 2022

Feature (What you would like to be added):
Defragmentor logic of backup-restore should also consider the etcd db size along with schedule time of defragmentation and if Defragmentor observed that etcd db size has crossed the certain limit(say 7Gi) which is close to etcd db quota bytes then it should trigger the out-of-schedule defragmentation on etcd so that etcd db size won't crosses the practical limit of 8Gi.

Motivation (Why is this needed?):
It has been observed that sometimes etcd's db size abruptly increases and cross the practical limit of 8Gi which leads to unavailability of etcd cluster. To resolve this we require the manual intervention to trigger the defragmentation on etcd, to avoid this manual intervention our defragmentor should smart enough to detect this and trigger the out-of-schedule defragmentation on etcd.

Approach/Hint to the implement solution (optional):

@ishan16696 ishan16696 added the kind/enhancement Enhancement, improvement, extension label Nov 11, 2022
@abdasgupta abdasgupta added this to the v0.22.0 milestone Nov 14, 2022
@ishan16696 ishan16696 removed this from the v0.22.0 milestone Dec 12, 2022
@abdasgupta abdasgupta added the priority/2 Priority (lower number equals higher priority) label Jan 5, 2023
@ishan16696
Copy link
Member Author

This feature can also mitigate NOSPACE alarm #531

@shreyas-s-rao
Copy link
Collaborator

/assign @ishan16696

@gardener-robot gardener-robot added the lifecycle/stale Nobody worked on this for 6 months (will further age) label Feb 6, 2024
@ishan16696 ishan16696 removed their assignment Apr 8, 2024
@gardener-robot gardener-robot added lifecycle/rotten Nobody worked on this for 12 months (final aging stage) and removed lifecycle/stale Nobody worked on this for 6 months (will further age) labels Dec 16, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/enhancement Enhancement, improvement, extension lifecycle/rotten Nobody worked on this for 12 months (final aging stage) priority/2 Priority (lower number equals higher priority)
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants