-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
add support for specifying iops and thoroughput when using hyperdisks #17685
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
0327e11 to
c7fb5f1
Compare
|
I'm going to create a new presubmit that uses hyperdisks to test the logic |
| if ig.Spec.RootVolume != nil { | ||
| volumeSize = fi.ValueOf(ig.Spec.RootVolume.Size) | ||
| volumeType = fi.ValueOf(ig.Spec.RootVolume.Type) | ||
| volumeIops = fi.ValueOf(ig.Spec.RootVolume.IOPS) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Wait - did GCP add the fields we already had in our schema? That was very kind of them :-)
| if a != nil && changes != nil { | ||
| empty := &Disk{} | ||
| if !reflect.DeepEqual(empty, changes) { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("cannot apply changes to Disk: %v", changes) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not a blocker, but can we change iops/throughput after creation? Would be nice to support this, as I imagine it's quite a common thing to do as clusters scale up!
|
Failing tests, but lgtm /lgtm (Not that it will do you much good while tests are failing!) |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: justinsb 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 |
|
(I think if you run |
|
The Kubernetes project has merge-blocking tests that are currently too flaky to consistently pass. This bot retests PRs for certain kubernetes repos according to the following rules:
You can:
/retest-required |
4 similar comments
|
The Kubernetes project has merge-blocking tests that are currently too flaky to consistently pass. This bot retests PRs for certain kubernetes repos according to the following rules:
You can:
/retest-required |
|
The Kubernetes project has merge-blocking tests that are currently too flaky to consistently pass. This bot retests PRs for certain kubernetes repos according to the following rules:
You can:
/retest-required |
|
The Kubernetes project has merge-blocking tests that are currently too flaky to consistently pass. This bot retests PRs for certain kubernetes repos according to the following rules:
You can:
/retest-required |
|
The Kubernetes project has merge-blocking tests that are currently too flaky to consistently pass. This bot retests PRs for certain kubernetes repos according to the following rules:
You can:
/retest-required |
|
@upodroid: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/lgtm cancel |
What this PR does / why we need it:
GCE allows you to specify IOPS and throughput when using hyperdisks
https://cloud.google.com/compute/docs/disks/hd-types/hyperdisk-balanced
We use hyperdisks with the latest gen instances for scale testing, so I'm looking to tweak the default values set by Google.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #17656
Special notes for your reviewer: