►
From YouTube: Kubernetes SIG Node CI 20230920
Description
SIG Node CI weekly meeting. Agenda and notes: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fb-ugvgdSVIkkuJ388_nhp2pBTy_4HEVg5848Xy7n5U/edit#heading=h.2v8vzknys4nk
GMT20230920-170330_Recording_2560x1440.mp4
A
D
Yeah
hi
everyone
yeah,
just
as
part
of
the
cap
I
was
working
on.
You
know
the
I
was
working
on
the
split
image
file
system,
but
I
noticed
that
Cuba
already
supports
a
dedicated
image
file
system,
but
we
don't
have
any
test
coverage
of
that,
and
so
I
was
a
little
con.
I
mean
I
like
to
add
eviction
tests
for
the
split
disk
case,
but
I
think
I
probably
want
to
add
it.
Also
for
the
dedicated
image
file
system
and
I
was
just
curious.
What
the
group
thinks
about
that.
A
So
definitely
allowed
definitely
need
to
to
be
added.
We
have
a
long
history
of
two
eviction
test,
failing
one
on
cryo
and
one
on
contain
energy,
and
it's
different
eviction
test.
I.
Think
latest
I
heard
that
one
container
the
eviction
test
fails
because
it
failed
to
fill
up
disk
fast
enough,
because
this
became
too
big
on
infra
nodes.
So
if
you
can
look
into
that
as
well,
it'll
be
really
appreciated.
D
D
A
E
D
A
C
D
A
A
A
D
A
D
A
D
Yeah
I
have
cryo
set
up
locally.
That's
the
one
I'm
testing,
with
the
main
difference
is
stats,
which
is
why
the
the
one
of
them
is
failing
in
container
Rd
and
it's
not
failing
in
cryo,
because
I
think
somebody
I
think
David
Porter
pointed
out.
There's
some
issue
with
pids
I
think
around
stats.
That's
the
last
issue.
I
saw
around
that
and
that's
failing
for
cryo
stats
provider,
but
I
don't
think
it
fails.
For
this
anything.
That's
using
the
C
advisor
stats
provider,
which
is
cryo.
A
D
A
A
And
for
previous
item
I
I,
remember
like
when
we
configure
images
to
run
on
I
think
we
can
do
machine
type
and
some
like
some
other
characteristics,
but
we
cannot
specify
and
put
disk
size
if
you
will
be
looking
at
agent
extra
disk.
Maybe
you
all
can
also
look
into
configuring
boot
disk
size,
because
I
believe
that
was
an
issue
for
eviction.
Tests
that
would
like
default
would
just
size
increased
and
we
failed
to
filled
up
efficiency.
A
A
B
B
B
C
B
C
C
C
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
C
E
E
B
I,
wasn't
it
I
was
talking
about
yeah
I
think
this
is
intended
Behavior,
oh
basically,
when
you
delete
a
post,
you
have
termination
works
period,
yeah,
and
it
specifies
how
long
it
waits
between
sending
industry
a
safe
term
and
then
a
stick
kill
to
delete
the
boss.
Once
it's
on
the
hill,
the
ball
is
deleted
completely.
So
if.
C
F
B
E
A
B
C
A
E
Garbage
collector
for
container
images
is
unpredictable
and
inconsistent.
We
got
which
collector
for
container
image
life
cycle
does
not
seem
to
adapt
to
the
documentation
and
provided
parameters
and
the
dogs.
The
configured
high
threshold
percent
value
triggers
garbage
collection,
which
deletes
images
in
order
based
on
the
last
time
they
were
used.
Okay,
starting
with
the
oldest
first,
the
cubelet
deletes
images
under
disk
usage
reaches
the
low
threshold
percent
value
from
the
test
is
not.
This
does
not
appear
to
be
the
case.
E
Often
often,
the
garbage
collection
will
delete
way,
more
images
than
required,
often
dropping
below
the
low
threshold
percentage
and
deleting
three
four
at
a
time
either
create
dummy
images
or
Identify
some
appropriate
for
image,
deploy
a
port
and
then
delete
it.
The
image
will
Dash
after
a
while,
the
disk
space
will
reach
low
threshold
percent.
First
and
GBC
will
be
triggered.
The
GC
shouldn't
either
delete
the
earliest
unused
image.
This
does
not
happen.
Priorities
sometimes
given
to
other
images
and
more
than
one
is
deleted
in
a
random
order.
B
E
E
E
E
B
D
A
E
E
A
C
D
E
Cubelet
and
respect
resolve
conf
when
resolved
one
is
empty
or
full
of
comments.
When
passing
the
world
can't
play,
it
did
not
respect
the
option
and
still
copy
the
Etc
resolve
conf
to
the
Pod.
What
makes
it
special
is
that
resolved
cons
provided
by
myself
is
empty
after
skimming
the
code
I
found.
The
logic
is
problematic
because
resolve
quantity
is
empty
and
empty
area
or
no
error
is
returned,
as
if
DNS
policy
is
default.
E
The
part
DNS
type
turns
to
because
a
container
D
will
get
an
empty
DNS
config,
so
it
will
copy
resolve
con
from
host
to
container
the
expectation
is
cubelet
should
refuse
to
apply
the
wrong
empty,
resolve
conf,
to
create
a
pod
and
complain
with
errors,
so
I
think
they
want
like
they
are
suggesting.
We
have
some
validation
for
this
parameter.
E
E
A
They
say
that
if
you
pass
an
empty
resolve,
config
then
Google,
it
will
disregard
it
and
use
it
default.
One
and
this
causes
some
problems,
I'm,
not
sure
what
kind
of
problems
it
causes
for
them,
but
but,
like
Antonio,
asked
like,
why
would
you
even
consider
it
passing
empty
resolve
config
file,
and
the
scenario
here
is
that
somebody
pass
a
resolve,
config
files
that
is
empty
originally,
but
then
it
will
be
written
by.
A
C
E
A
Nice
condition
so
between
somebody
python,
empty
file
and
filling
it
up
two
years
later,
so
it's
kind
of
a
race
between
like
how
configuration
being
applied
so
instead
of
writing
config
file
first
and
then
starts
in
kublet.
Somebody
start
kublet
and
then
want
to
populate
this
file
because
it
will
be
added
later.
A
A
C
A
C
E
E
The
memory
manager
unexpected
admission
error,
dual
socket
server
with
threads
and
GP
manager,
started
policy,
topology
manager
policy
based
effort,
10
gigs
of
RAM
watched
here.
If
I
try
to
allocate
two
guaranteed
pods
of
this
one
is
admitted
and
the
second
one
fails
with
unexpected
admission
error,
even
if
it
would
fit
using
memory
of
both
pneuma
nodes.
E
E
F
Hey
I'm
I'm
monitoring
this
one
a
few
and
this
other
person
is
a
teammate
of
mine.
So
we
can,
you
can
even
assign
it
to
me
and
we're
going
complete
the
triage
we're
discussing
the
if,
if
the
behavior
is
I
mean
consistent
with
the
cap
and
the
expected
Behavior
or
not,
and
we're
still
trying
to
figure
out
if
it's
an
actual
bug
or
not.
F
But
the
behavior
is
not
that
and
they
were
expecting
the
the
Pod
to
be
to
be
pending,
but
this
is
not
actually
possible.
So
the
only
possible
behavior
is
that
if
the
pods
goes,
It
goes
up
and
consumes
memory
from
both
Numa
zones,
but
we,
this
is
actually
or
memory
manager,
specific
behavior.
So
we
need
to
actually
to
Deep
dive
with
the
behavior.
Is
legal
or
not?
Okay,.
F
A
F
E
C
E
A
A
E
C
C
A
C
A
A
E
D
I,
looked
at
this
one,
a
little
bit,
I
think
what
they're
trying
to
say
is.
They
probably
are
suggesting
it's
not
a
bug.
It's
a
feature,
I
think
they
want
CRI
to
tell
you
whether
or
not
the
images
are
compressed
or
not,
and
then
they
already
posted
an
issue
on
the
CRI
tools,
repo
and
I.
Guess
somebody
suggested
posting
it
here,
because
at
least
that's
what
I
think
is
going
on
in
this
issue.