UPSTREAM: <carry>: fix max cluster size calculation on scale up #47
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
When scaling up the calculation for computing the maximum cluster size does not take into account the number of any upcoming nodes and it is possible to grow the cluster beyond the cluster size (--max-nodes-total). Fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670695
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/XS
ingvagabund
reviewed
Mar 7, 2019
|
/lgtm |
|
This has been verified and tested by QE. @sunzhaohua2, thanks for all the testing efforts over the past few days. 👍 |
|
Upstream PR: kubernetes#1771 |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
When scaling up the calculation for computing the maximum cluster size
does not take into account the number of any upcoming nodes and it is
possible to grow the cluster beyond the cluster
size (--max-nodes-total).
Fixes: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1670695