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

Document API server /livez and /readyz #20888

Closed
johscheuer opened this issue May 11, 2020 · 9 comments · Fixed by #21185
Closed

Document API server /livez and /readyz #20888

johscheuer opened this issue May 11, 2020 · 9 comments · Fixed by #21185
Labels
language/en Issues or PRs related to English language sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. sig/docs Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Docs.

Comments

@johscheuer
Copy link
Contributor

This is a Feature Request

During creating this PR: kubernetes/kubernetes#90970 I found out that the /livez and /readyz endpoints of the kube-apiserver are not really document. Also the documentation should highlight that /livez and /readyz are the new endpoints which should be used (otherwise some flags like --livez-grace-period and --shutdown-delay-duration will be ignored.

What would you like to be added

It would be nice to describe the differences of the endpoints and when the specific endpoints should be used (or not). Probably a sub page in https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/administer-cluster would be nice (or maybe it fits somewhere else)

Why is this needed
It would be nice to know what endpoints should be used to create a readinessProbe and a livenessProbe and what are the difference between these 3 endpoints.

Comments

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

/sig network node

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added sig/network Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Network. sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. labels May 12, 2020
@neolit123
Copy link
Member

actually livez/readyz is kube-apiserver only, so:

/remove-sig node network
/sig api-machinery

though, one way to get the attention of sig-api-machinery would have been to log this issue in k/kubernetes.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. and removed sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. sig/network Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Network. labels May 12, 2020
@sftim
Copy link
Contributor

sftim commented May 12, 2020

/sig docs

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the sig/docs Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Docs. label May 12, 2020
@sftim
Copy link
Contributor

sftim commented May 12, 2020

@johscheuer this sounds like reference documentation to me, rather than a task.

@johscheuer
Copy link
Contributor Author

That's right, @sftim do you have any preferred place where we could put this documentation? If so I would start writing down some documentation that can be reviewed by api-machinery.

@sftim
Copy link
Contributor

sftim commented May 13, 2020

@sftim
Copy link
Contributor

sftim commented May 13, 2020

If there's a place in the code for kube-apiserver to add text that ends up on https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/kube-apiserver/ and explains the health checks, that's also a valid approach.

@johscheuer
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/health-checks/ is the best place, I don't think that the command line reference is the best place. I try to write something down this week.

@tengqm
Copy link
Contributor

tengqm commented Jun 14, 2020

/language en

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the language/en Issues or PRs related to English language label Jun 14, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
language/en Issues or PRs related to English language sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. sig/docs Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Docs.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants