priority scheduling: add priority queue #6149
Conversation
karmada-bot
added
the
kind/feature
karmada-bot
added
the
size/XXL
|
@whitewindmills: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: wengyao04, zclyne, LeonZh0u. Note that only karmada-io members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs. In response to this: 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. |
whitewindmills
force-pushed
the
priority-scheduling-queue
branch
from
7ef5e18 to
3199c80
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
/assign
@whitewindmills Can you take care of the failing tests?
|
yeah, I'm working on it. |
whitewindmills
force-pushed
the
priority-scheduling-queue
branch
from
3199c80 to
e5d5e1a
Compare
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
whitewindmills
force-pushed
the
priority-scheduling-queue
branch
2 times, most recently
from
4594093 to
140f5b5
Compare
|
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #6149 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 48.10% 47.98% -0.13%
==========================================
Files 668 674 +6
Lines 55316 55760 +444
==========================================
+ Hits 26611 26757 +146
- Misses 26970 27259 +289
- Partials 1735 1744 +9
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
Signed-off-by: whitewindmills <[email protected]>
whitewindmills
force-pushed
the
priority-scheduling-queue
branch
from
140f5b5 to
c04fcd6
Compare
|
ready to review. |
|
Shall we have a quick chat at today's community meeting? |
|
@RainbowMango |
| // ExplicitPriority returns the explicit priority declared | ||
| // by '.spec.SchedulePriority.Priority'. | ||
| func (s *ResourceBindingSpec) ExplicitPriority() int32 { | ||
| if s.SchedulePriority == nil { | ||
| return 0 | ||
| } | ||
| return s.SchedulePriority.Priority | ||
| } |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| // ExplicitPriority returns the explicit priority declared | |
| // by '.spec.SchedulePriority.Priority'. | |
| func (s *ResourceBindingSpec) ExplicitPriority() int32 { | |
| if s.SchedulePriority == nil { | |
| return 0 | |
| } | |
| return s.SchedulePriority.Priority | |
| } | |
| // SchedulePriorityValue returns the scheduling priority declared | |
| // by '.spec.SchedulePriority.Priority'. | |
| func (s *ResourceBindingSpec) SchedulePriorityValue() int32 { | |
| if s.SchedulePriority == nil { | |
| return 0 | |
| } | |
| return s.SchedulePriority.Priority | |
| } |
Given that ResourceBinding may introduce another priority other than the schedule aspect, I'd like to give it a more straightforward name.
| @@ -239,7 +238,7 @@ func NewScheduler(dynamicClient dynamic.Interface, karmadaClient karmadaclientse | |||
| for _, opt := range opts { | |||
| opt(&options) | |||
| } | |||
| queue := workqueue.NewTypedRateLimitingQueueWithConfig(ratelimiterflag.DefaultControllerRateLimiter[any](options.RateLimiterOptions), workqueue.TypedRateLimitingQueueConfig[any]{Name: "scheduler-queue"}) | |||
| queue := internalqueue.NewSchedulingQueue(internalqueue.WithRateLimitingOptions(options.RateLimiterOptions)) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we use the legacy queue if the feature gate is disabled?
| if !features.FeatureGate.Enabled(features.PriorityBasedScheduling) { | ||
| return &rateLimitingSchedulingQueue{ | ||
| delegate: workqueue.NewTypedRateLimitingQueueWithConfig(ratelimiterflag.DefaultControllerRateLimiter[*QueuedBindingInfo](options.rateLimitingOptions), | ||
| workqueue.TypedRateLimitingQueueConfig[*QueuedBindingInfo]{Name: "scheduler-queue"}), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@RainbowMango we use the legacy queue here if the feature gate is disabled
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
part of #5961
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: