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

Fill in the LastUpdateTime Field of VpaCheckpoint Status with Correct Time. #4250

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Aug 16, 2021

Conversation

PhdLoLi
Copy link
Contributor

@PhdLoLi PhdLoLi commented Aug 10, 2021

Currently, the "LastUpdateTime" field of the Status of VpaCheckpoint is not set, which is always "NULL" now.

Actually, we found that this filed is very helpful for us to judge whether the vpa Recommender component is working efficiently.

The logic is as below:
(1) If the Recommender component can completely update all vpas in one "RunOnce" cycle, the vpacheckpoints will also be updated in time. In other words, if there are so many vpas to update in one operating cycle (or the "metricsFetcherInterval" is set too short), which cause context timeout, then the update of vpacheckpoints may be delayed for a long time.
(2) If there is no change of any filed of vpa (target, lowerbound and etc), the vpa itself will not be updated. So we can not rely on the update of vpa to detect if the Recommender process vpas and vpacheckpoints efficiently.
(3) In our production environment, the situation described in (1) happened very often, we want to detect this situation and make adjustment accordingly as soon as possible.

And finally we found that the "LastUpdateTime" field of VpaCheckpoint Status can help solve such problem, which is not set yet Now.

We fill in this filed by ourself and use it for a while, and is not particularly convenient when we want to upgrade the code base. So we decide to make this pull request to merge this tiny but very helpful change.

Thank you very much.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 10, 2021
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

Unknown CLA label state. Rechecking for CLA labels.

Send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/check-cla

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. label Aug 10, 2021
@bskiba
Copy link
Member

bskiba commented Aug 16, 2021

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 16, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bskiba, PhdLoLi

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 Aug 16, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 62e79c3 into kubernetes:master Aug 16, 2021
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. 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/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants