Enhancements: Schedule DaemonSet Pods by kube-scheduler

[k82cn]

Feature Description

• One-line feature description (can be used as a release note):
• Primary contact (assignee): @k82cn
• Responsible SIGs: sig-scheduling, sig-apps
• Design proposal link (community repo): Preemption support in DaemonSet controller , Schedule DaemonSet Pods by default scheduler
• Link to e2e and/or unit tests:
• Reviewer(s) - (for LGTM) recommend having 2+ reviewers (at least one from code-area OWNERS file) agreed to review. Reviewers from multiple companies preferred: @bsalamat , @timothysc , @bgrant0607 @janetkuo
• Approver (likely from SIG/area to which feature belongs): @bsalamat , @timothysc, @janetkuo
• Feature target (which target equals to which milestone):
  
  
  
  • Alpha release target (x.y): 1.11
  
  
  • Beta release target (x.y): 1.12
  
  
  • Stable release target (x.y):
  
  

[bsalamat]

ref/ kubernetes/kubernetes#57471

[yastij]

/cc

[kow3ns]

1. We had a long discussion about doing this here and decided not to. Is there a particular reason we should reconsider doing this now.
2. Features are closed for 1.10. Also, I don't see how you could reasonably release this as stable in 1.10.
3. We had the discussion in (1) prior to releasing DaemonSet to GA, is there a strong motivation to reconsider this now?
   /cc @janetkuo @bgrant0607

[bsalamat]

@kow3ns There has been more discussions and the SIG scheduling has decided to go in this direction. @bgrant0607 has been in the loop in the discussions.

Please refer to this doc for more details: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1v7hsusMaeImQrOagktQb40ePbK6Jxp1hzgFB9OZa_ew/edit

[janetkuo]

• Feature target (which target equals to which milestone):
  
  
  
  • Alpha release target (x.y)
  
  
  • Beta release target (x.y)
  
  
  • Stable release target (x.y) 1.10
  
  

From https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/59630 this feature should be alpha, instead of stable. And if this targets 1.10, it needs to be added to 1.10 milestone.

Also, have any of you filed exception request for this feature?

[janetkuo]

@jberkus the exception is filed here: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kubernetes-milestone-burndown/sPvjpRMf5es

Adding to v1.10 milestone to get attention from release team.

[justaugustus]

@k82cn
Any plans for this in 1.11?

If so, can you please ensure the feature is up-to-date with the appropriate:

• Description
• Milestone
• Assignee(s)
• Labels:
  
  
  
  • stage/{alpha,beta,stable}
  
  
  • sig/*
  
  
  • kind/feature
  
  

cc @idvoretskyi

[k82cn]

• Milestone: 1.11
• Assignee(s): @k82cn

/stage alpha
/sig scheduling
/kind feature

[justaugustus]

Thanks for the update, @k82cn!

[mdlinville]

@k82cn please fill out the appropriate line item of the
1.11 feature tracking spreadsheet
and open a placeholder docs PR against the
release-1.11 branch
by 5/25/2018 (tomorrow as I write this) if new docs or docs changes are
needed and a relevant PR has not yet been opened.

[k82cn]

Doc for 1.11: https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/8842

[mdlinville]

@justaugustus @idvoretskyi apparently this feature went in for 1.10 and it's just that it was missing docs until now. So I don't think it should be considered a 1.11 feature. Is that correct? At least the docs submitted in the linked docs PR only mention "1.10 and higher" several times.

[k82cn]

@mistyhacks , that should be 1.11; part of this feature are merged in 1.10 (which is considered as separate part), so I mark them 1.10 :).

[mdlinville]

Oh, ok. Thanks for the clarification.

[janetkuo]

@k82cn we need to change feature gate comment of this to 1.11 (instead of 1.10):
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/c2e3d0526d788ae3792626bbc165101b8f5ada8e/pkg/features/kube_features.go#L251

[k82cn]

/milestone v1.12
/stage beta

Assignee: @k82cn

We'd like to move this to beta in 1.12, so it can work together with priority/preemption :)

[k82cn]

We'd like to move this to beta in 1.12, so it can work together with priority/preemption :)

@mistyhacks , @justaugustus :)

[Huang-Wei]

/cc

[bsalamat]

@k82cn we should enable this feature by default in 1.12. I think it would be great if we could enable this as soon as possible and let it soak for a while before 1.12 code freeze.

[k82cn]

Sure, I'll work with Huang-Wei@ to make ready ASAP :)

[kacole2]

@k82cn @bsalamat is this still targeting Beta in 1.12? This still has the 1.11 milestone tagged as well so we need to update it accordingly.

If there are any updates, please explicitly ping @justaugustus, @kacole2, @robertsandoval, @rajendar38 to note that it is ready to be included in the Features Tracking Spreadsheet for Kubernetes 1.12.

---

Please note that the Features Freeze is July 31st, after which any incomplete Feature issues will require an Exception request to be accepted into the milestone.

In addition, please be aware of the following relevant deadlines:

• Docs deadline (open placeholder PRs): 8/21
• Test case freeze: 8/28

Please make sure all PRs for features have relevant release notes included as well.

Happy shipping!

[Huang-Wei]

@kacole2 as far as I know, yes. I'm working on it and will ping you guys for updates. Thanks!

[justaugustus]

Thanks for the update! This has been added to the 1.12 Tracking sheet.

[zparnold]

Hey there! @k82cn I'm the wrangler for the Docs this release. Is there any chance I could have you open up a docs PR against the release-1.12 branch as a placeholder? That gives us more confidence in the feature shipping in this release and gives me something to work with when we start doing reviews/edits. Thanks! If this feature does not require docs, could you please update the features tracking spreadsheet to reflect it?

[Huang-Wei]

@zparnold kubernetes/website#9923 is the placeholder.

[justaugustus]

@k82cn @Huang-Wei --
Any update on docs status for this feature? Are we still planning to land it for 1.12?
At this point, code freeze is upon us, and docs are due on 9/7 (2 days).
If we don't here anything back regarding this feature ASAP, we'll need to remove it from the milestone.

cc: @zparnold @jimangel @tfogo

[Huang-Wei]

@justaugustus Yes, it's still targeting for 1.12.

• code review is still in progress, and close to be merged
• docs update (kubernetes/website#9923) is ready for review

[justaugustus]

Thanks for the update!

[claurence]

Kubernetes 1.13 is going to be a 'stable' release since the cycle is only 10 weeks. We encourage no big alpha features and only consider adding this feature if you have a high level of confidence it will make code slush by 11/09. Are there plans for this enhancement to graduate to alpha/beta/stable within the 1.13 release cycle? If not, can you please remove it from the 1.12 milestone or add it to 1.13?

We are also now encouraging that every new enhancement aligns with a KEP. If a KEP has been created, please link to it in the original post. Please take the opportunity to develop a KEP

[bsalamat]

@claurence This feature is promoted to beta in 1.12 and there is no plan to graduate it in 1.13.

[kacole2]

thanks for the update!
/milestone clear

[fejta-bot]

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

[k82cn]

/remove-lifecycle stale

[claurence]

@k82cn Hello - I’m the enhancement’s lead for 1.14 and I’m checking in on this issue to see what work (if any) is being planned for the 1.14 release. Enhancements freeze is Jan 29th and I want to remind that all enhancements must have a KEP

[kacole2]

Hello @k82cn , I'm the Enhancement Lead for 1.15. Is this feature going to be graduating alpha/beta/stable stages in 1.15? Please let me know so it can be tracked properly and added to the spreadsheet.

Once coding begins, please list all relevant k/k PRs in this issue so they can be tracked properly.

[mariantalla]

Hi @k82cn - I'm an Enhancements shadow for 1.16.

Is this feature going to be graduating alpha/beta/stable stages in 1.16? Please let me know so it can be added to the 1.16 Tracking Spreadsheet.

Once coding begins or if it already has, please list all relevant k/k PRs in this issue so they can be tracked properly.

I noticed there's no KEP linked in the issue description; as a reminder, every enhancement requires a KEP in an implementable state with Graduation Criteria explaining each alpha/beta/stable stages requirements.

As a reminder, 1.16 milestone dates are: Enhancement Freeze 7/30 and Code Freeze 8/29.

Thanks!

[k82cn]

we'd like to promote this feature to GA in 1.17 :)

[mrbobbytables]

👋 hey there @k82cn -- 1.17 Enhancements lead here. I wanted to check in and see if you think this Enhancement will be graduating to stable in 1.17?

The current release schedule is:

• Monday, September 23 - Release Cycle Begins
• Tuesday, October 15, EOD PST - Enhancements Freeze
• Thursday, November 14, EOD PST - Code Freeze
• Tuesday, November 19 - Docs must be completed and reviewed
• Monday, December 9 - Kubernetes 1.17.0 Released

If you do, once coding begins please list all relevant k/k PRs in this issue so they can be tracked properly. 👍

Thanks!

[palnabarun]

Hi @k82cn , -- 1.17 enhancements shadow here.

Just a friendly reminder. We are just 5 days away from the Enhancements Freeze.

For the KEP to be considered for 1.17,

1. KEP PR must be merged
2. KEP should be in an implementable state
3. KEP should have test plans and graduation criteria.

[k82cn]

1.17 enhancements shadow here.

ack :)

[mrbobbytables]

Looking over the KEP, the test plan references tests for ScheduleDaemonSetPods - is it possible to add a link to the tests or preferably a testgrid dashboard?

Thanks!

[guineveresaenger]

@draveness @k82cn - release lead here.
Especially given kubernetes/kubernetes#83829, we would very much like there to be a link to existing tests, and drop a few words about the test plan specifics in the KEP. Can you add such and update?

Overall, this graduation seems to be very much in line with reality and experience, we just want a bit more visibility to detail. I'd also second the request for more elaboration in kubernetes/kubernetes#83829.

[draveness]

Looking over the KEP, the test plan references tests for ScheduleDaemonSetPods - is it possible to add a link to the tests or preferably a testgrid dashboard?

I'll update the KEP

Overall, this graduation seems to be very much in line with reality and experience, we just want a bit more visibility to detail. I'd also second the request for more elaboration in kubernetes/kubernetes#83829.

Sure

[irvifa]

Hello @k82cn I'm one of the v1.17 docs shadows.
Does this enhancement for (or the work planned for v1.17) require any new docs (or modifications to existing docs)? If not, can you please update the 1.17 Enhancement Tracker Sheet (or let me know and I'll do so).

If so, just a friendly reminder we're looking for a PR against k/website (branch dev-1.17) due by Friday, November 8th, it can just be a placeholder PR at this time. Let me know if you have any questions!

[irvifa]

@k82cn

Since we're approaching Docs placeholder PR deadline on Nov 8th. Please try to get one in against k/website dev-1.17 branch.

[draveness]

@k82cn

Since we're approaching Docs placeholder PR deadline on Nov 8th. Please try to get one in against k/website dev-1.17 branch.

The document PR is here https://github.com/kubernetes/website/pull/17350

[mrbobbytables]

Hey there @draveness -- 1.17 Enhancements lead here. I just wanted to check back in regarding the upcoming code freeze on November 14th. It looks like just about everything is done going by the list in https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/82702. Do you know if the last outstanding issue (_"Refactor nodeShouldRunDaemonPod to remove useless return values"_) will make be merged in time?

[k82cn]

"Refactor nodeShouldRunDaemonPod to remove useless return values" is optional to me, it's just code refactor, no behaviour change :)

[jeremyrickard]

Hey @draveness @k82cn, Happy New Year! 1.18 Enhancements lead here 👋 Thanks for getting this across the line in 1.17!!

I'm going though and doing some cleanup for the milestone and checking on things that graduated in the last release. Since this graduated to GA in 1.17, I'd like to close this issue out but the KEP is still marked as implementable. Could you submit a PR to update the KEP to implemented and then we can close this issue out?

Thanks so much!

[draveness]

Hey @draveness @k82cn, Happy New Year! 1.18 Enhancements lead here 👋 Thanks for getting this across the line in 1.17!!

I'm going though and doing some cleanup for the milestone and checking on things that graduated in the last release. Since this graduated to GA in 1.17, I'd like to close this issue out but the KEP is still marked as implementable. Could you submit a PR to update the KEP to implemented and then we can close this issue out?

Thanks so much!

We could close this issue since this is already GA'ed

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@draveness: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

Hey @draveness @k82cn, Happy New Year! 1.18 Enhancements lead here 👋 Thanks for getting this across the line in 1.17!!

I'm going though and doing some cleanup for the milestone and checking on things that graduated in the last release. Since this graduated to GA in 1.17, I'd like to close this issue out but the KEP is still marked as implementable. Could you submit a PR to update the KEP to implemented and then we can close this issue out?

Thanks so much!

We could close this issue since this is already GA'ed

/close

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.

[jeremyrickard]

@draveness yes, I was just asking if you could update the status of the KEP :) It's still marked as implementable, but should be updated to say implemented...since it was :)

[draveness]

@draveness yes, I was just asking if you could update the status of the KEP :) It's still marked as implementable, but should be updated to say implemented...since it was :)

Thanks, I've opened #1437 to mark it as implemented