►
From YouTube: Kubernetes SIG Scheduling Weekly Meeting for 20230504
Description
Kubernetes SIG Scheduling Weekly Meeting 2023-05-04T16:56:01Z
A
A
A
That
is
another
option,
but
given
the
long
term
envisions
that
this
kind
of
a
general
Machinery
as
a
general
mechanism
that
can
be
so
have
something
talk
about
to
the
to
the
go
projects.
So
in
the
in
that,
in
that
with
that
being
said,
I
think
maybe
a
standalone
project
May
face
more
or
you
can
say
for
now
we
can
create
a
feature
branch
and
then,
by
sometimes
the
test,
the
test
has
been
mature
or
something
we
can
just
move
to
a
standalone
sub-project.
That
can
be
also
another
option.
A
B
That's
one
concern.
My
other
concern
is
that
we
already
struggle
with
communicating
what's
the
level
of
supportability,
of
the
scary,
plugins
repo
and
having
yet
another
custom
scheduler,
because
it's
at
the
end
of
the
day,
it's
a
custom
scheduler
having
yet
another
repo
for
another
custom.
Scheduler
within
within
six
scheduling,
is
adds
to
the
confusion
of
what's
what's
recommended.
A
I,
don't
I,
don't
read
it
as
another
repo
for
for
plugins
I!
Think
it's
not
a
repo
for
General
Pro
plugin
experiments.
So
my
my
point
is
that
this
project
is
is
for
General
experiments.
Instead
of
just
focus
on
schedule
parking.
It's
just
that
it's
used
schedule
parking
as
an
example
to
try
out
the
idea
so.
A
C
B
D
D
A
A
It's
supposed
to
be
Marketplace
for
people
to
contribute
the
idea,
implementation
design,
but
it's
not
overall
straighted
as
a
out
of
box
products.
So
basically
you
can
vendor.
You
can
just
use
them
as
this
all
right,
so
we
I
don't
think
we
it's
it's
just
too
much
for
us
to
say,
okay,
what
kind
of
maturity
we
can
support
for
each
sub-projects.
A
A
B
A
B
C
You
yeah,
so
let
me
go
over
that
yeah.
So,
first
of
all,
I'd
like
to
introduce
myself
and
a
couple
of
my
colleagues
on
the
call,
so
my
name
is
Prashant
and
I
have
Alessandro
and
Jeremy
with
me
on
the
call-
and
this
is
our
first
time
on
the
call.
So
hopefully
we
we
yeah,
we
do
follow
the
rules
and
all
of.
C
So
so
we
some
to
give
give
you
some
context.
We
are
working
on
openshift
and
specifically
on
the
multi-arch
compute
effort,
which
is
we
are
working
to
have
openshift
support
cluster
with
compute
nodes
of
different
architectures.
We
are
seeing
a
lot
of
traction
with
Cloud
providers
like
AWS
and
Azure,
who
have
now
come
out
with
arm
64
nodes,
and
we
are
getting
a
lot
of
users
who
are
interested
in
them
and
with
that
comes
the
question
of
every
user
would
ask
that.
Why
is
my
like?
C
They
would
have
this
cluster
up
and
they
would
say
why
is
my
workload
not
working
on
on
this
node
like
what
is
going
on
my
workload
is
crashing
and
then
we
would
look
at
it
and
we
would
tell
them
that.
Oh,
your
workload
is
x86
workload,
but
it's
running
on
this
arm
system.
So
we've
had
these
kind
of
on
this
arm.
Vm
on
it's
landed
on
the
Pod.
It's
landed
on
the
arm
node,
so
you
have
to
set
the
node
Affinity.
C
So
we
were
wondering
what
is
the
best
way.
So
this
is
like.
We
want
this
to
be
kind
of
an
introductory
call
where
we
present
ourselves-
and
we
ask
like
what
is
the
best
way
to
go
about
doing
this.
We
have
some
ideas.
We
have
some
proposals
that
we
would
like
to
bring
forth
to
you
all
of
you
and
see
which
ones
make
sense
or
or
which
ones
don't
or
which
path
forward
is
the
best
to
proceed.
How?
How
should
we
proceed
on
this?
A
C
So
right
now
we
don't
have,
as
you
know,
like
the
only
way
that
we
are
asking
users
to
do.
It
is
to
set
the
affinities
in
that
part
spec
to
to
get
around
this
issue,
but
we
we
have
are
floating
around
like
a
couple
of
ideas.
One
is
we
were
thinking
about,
having
a
scheduler
plugin,
an
out
of
tree
plugin,
which
could
which
could
run
in
the
filter
phase
and
it
could.
C
It
could
have
a
pre-filter
phase
where
it
detects
the
architecture,
the
the
the
image
is
inspected
and
the
architecture
of
the
image
is
detected
and
in
the
filter
phase
the
nodes
are
filtered
based
on
the
architecture
and
the
and
the
filtered
list
is
sent
across
to
the
next
step.
So
that
was
one
potential
solution
that
we
were
discussing
about.
Well,
we
could
have
a
multi-arch
aware,
scheduler
plugin.
There
are
other
proposals
that
we
are
also
looking
into.
C
So
we
could
typically
also
leverage
that
as
a
solution
where
we
set
the
scheduling,
feature
gate
for
a
part
and
then
have
a
controller,
come
in
and
intercept
the
node
list
and
and
do
the
work
that
we
wanted
to
do,
based
looking
at
the
image
and
filtering
the
list
of
nodes
when
sending
it
back
and
removing
the
scheduling
feature
gate.
So
these
are
some
of
the
potential
solutions
that
we
have
discussed
and
we
want
to.
C
A
Http,
so
it
seems
it's
basically
two
months.
One
is
that
you
can
just
use
a
the
current
existing
scheduling,
primitive,
like
not
Affinity
or
past
schedule,
Readiness
to
check
out
this
issue.
The
other
is
more
smooth
and
more
smoothness
that
you
can
just
impress
us
plugin
to
multiply
doing
this,
for
you
so
basically
to
to
kind
of
waste.
I
would
say
it
depends
on
how
you
can
handle
these
two
solutions.
A
C
I
mean
I,
let
Alessandra
talk
to
it
in
a
minute,
but
we
have
invested
some
work
in
the
scheduler
plugin
method
and
we
have
like
I,
think
a
very,
very
basic,
like
a
skeleton
prototype
of
the
of
the
scheduler
plugin,
where
it
inspects
the
image
and
then
it
filters
like
based
on
the
like,
based
on
the
notes
it
filters
based
on
the
arch
we
were.
We
were
gravitating
towards
using
the
like
a
scheduler
plugin,
just
because.
E
C
In
our
mind,
it
becomes
very
simple
like
it
just
organically
fits
into
the
scheduler.
We
don't
have
to
write
a
separate
controller
just
for
this
purpose.
All
we
need
is
already
there
in
the
scheduler
and
the
plugin
already
like
the
the
the
the
plug-in
pipeline
already
gives
us
all
this
information
that
we
need
and
it
passes
on
to
all
the
relevant
information.
So
it's
just
a
matter
of
intercepting
and
inspecting
the
image
to
get
the
architecture,
so
we
were
leaning
towards
that
I'd
like
to
understand
why
you
think
it's
not
well.
B
All
of
these
details
need
to
be
explained
before
we
can
say.
Yes,
this
can
be
in
the
scheduler
and
again
you
can
you.
Yes,
you
can
solve
this
out
of
three.
You
can
create
a
webhook
that
might
work
for
you,
but
but
for
a
feature
that
has
to
go
in
the
scheduler.
It
has
to
work
everywhere
and
it
has
to
like.
We
cannot
add
it's
scheduler
doesn't
have
access
to
Internet
today
right
and
these
my
this
will
include
the
dependency
on
internet
right.
A
E
E
Our
ID
and
the
reason
we
have
here
is
mostly
to
understand
whether
it's
possible
to
so
yeah
I.
Imagine,
by
the
way
before
we
are
working
together
and
our
idea
of
the
reason
why
we
came
here
and
this
meeting
is
to
understand
whether
it
is
possible
to
have
eight
thousand
out
of
three
or
in
three
plugin,
whatever.
Obviously,
by
solving
all
the
issues
that
you
were
discussing
into
the
issue
itself,
of
which
the
most
heat
blockers
seem
to
be
register,
authentication
and
the
directive
reachability
right.
E
Rule
needs
another
material
at
that
point.
Is
this
a
possibility
that
we
can
I
consider
into
an
amount
of
three
plugin?
Probably
yes,
because
it
could
be
in
the
users
to
configure
that's
what
about
an
entry?
Plugin
and
another
thing
is:
can
we
have?
Can
we
consider
these
plugin
as
disabled
by
default
and
make
the
users
able
to
add
some
secrets
to
configure
that
notes,
level
credentials.
E
And
finally,
is
there
some
are
there
any
cases
that
we
can
already
access
and
like
test
cases
for
which
we
can
consider
the
different
scenarios
where
the
scheduler
should
work
in
the
sense
that
one
can
think
also
cluster,
where
some
nodes
are
able
to
access
the
resistance
networks,
not
in
terms
of
registered
analysis
and
other
nodes
can
nodes.
But
is
this
something
that's
one
should
consider
or
not.
B
E
Okay-
and
this
is
why
I
we
were
wondering
about
the
entry
plugin,
because
we
know
that
the
autoscaler
can
ex
can
simulate
the
scheduler
and
let's
give
them
three
plugins
or
filtering
plugins,
but
depending
on
execute
out
of
trip
again.
So
the
discussion
should
go
not
considering
either
a
controller
that
will
be
able
to
provide
information
for
the
both
sites
and
eventually
and
maybe
for
I,
don't
know
the
auto
scaler.
Some
of
us
get
expanded.
B
A
A
If
you
trigger
Delta
schedule,
you
have
to
assume
that
if
you
rely
on
some
internet
access,
you
have
to
assume
that,
because
those
killer
have
the
same
ethernet
access
to
the
registry
to
get
the
same
kind
of
information.
Otherwise,
although
you
will
use
the
plugins
logic,
but
the
topology
network
issues,
the
different
that
may
be.
E
E
B
Yes,
I
think
the
point
of
the
of
in
the
thread.
The
main
point
is
that,
well
it's
not
the
scale
of
responsibility
to
know
what's
the
architecture
of
of
of
an
image
or
it
yeah,
it's
not
really
enough
to
obtain
that
information.
So
yeah
share.
Please
share
your
proposal,
but
it
needs
to
answer
all
these
questions
that
are
already
there.
E
A
B
Basically,
the
the
quick
idea
is
that
a
pod
could
have
access
to
the
topology
labels
so
that
you
can,
it
knows
where
it
is.
It
knows
which
ports
that
belong
to
the
same
job
are
close
or
in
the
same
Zone
same
topology
in
the
same
topology
domain.
So
that's
the
that's.
The
overall
desire
now
wait.
Wait,
wait.
A
B
B
A
B
B
A
Subscribe,
that's
good,
okay!
The
the
last
thing
is.
We
are
doing
some
planning
for
the
next
release
so
other
and
Abdullah.
So,
given
we
only
had
10
minutes
left,
do
you
think
we
can
maybe
leave
it
to
the
next
meeting,
because
it's
still
a
lot
of
things
to
discuss
or
you
just
want
to
kill
the
quick
go
through
with
this.
A
Will
see
what
so
the
first
one
I
will
give
a
very
high
level
introduction.
The
first
one
is.
We
are
already
Implement
some
similar
directive
in
potability
spread,
which
is
many
for
some
some
scenario
like
the
rolling
upgrade,
so
that
by
that
mechanism
can
be
generic
to
other
to
other
scheduling
directory.
A
We
already
provided
like
the
Pod
Affinity
apart
and
definitely
so
that
is
this
issue
is
for
that
and
it
didn't
catch
the
loss
of
the
training
of
127,
so
we're
going
to
Target
on
120
I'm
gonna
to
review
and
approve
it
for
the
other.
Three
like
I
said
it's,
oh
not
this
one
like
I,
said,
pause
to
part
just
spread
and
has
two
fields
that
can
get
more
benefits
during
the
ring
upgrade.
A
So
those
two
are
already
beta
and
we
don't
have
plans
to
promote
it
to
GA
yet
and
for
past
scheduling
Readiness,
because
this
were
beta
in
last
release,
so
we
don't
consider
getting
it
to
GA
too
soon,
so
those
three
features
will
stay
in
beta
for
128,
and
this
one
is
dynamic.
We
Source
our
location,
so
it's
a
cross,
multiple,
stick
and
definitely
scheduling
is
a
more
important
area.
So
Patrick
is
only
in
there
and
I.
A
Don't
know
his
plan
yet
maybe
not
to
promoting
128,
but
he
has
done
a
lot
of
a
good
thing
million
things
in
the
scheduling
Improvement,
as
well
as
the
scheduling
performance
test
framework,
and
so,
oh
by
the
way
this
one.
The
feature
overall,
is
to
want
to
generalize
the
PB
PVC
pattern
to
any
generic
resource,
so
it's
called
Dynamic
resource
and
after
that
is
another
ones
for
pre-emptions.
Optimization
I
think
the
last
release
we
didn't
make.
It
is
because
we
we
didn't
make
a
consensus
down
some
API
design.
Is
that
correct?
Although.
A
Okay,
so
yeah
we
are
trying
to
get
that
result
in
this
place.
So
this
is
for
the
pdb,
whether
it's
a
required
guarantee
your
best
efforts
and
the
last
one
is
a
new
one,
not
that
particular
with
scheduling,
but
some
of
the
code.
I
think
we
can
own.
So
so
the
history
is
there.
You
know
before
whether
how
you
label
to
sorry
I
tends
to
a
note
and
how
you
honor
the
effect
of
of
the
chance.
A
Just
a
bundle
in
one
components
called
know
the
first
lifecycle
controller.
So
here
I,
just
I
just
meant
the
no
execute
the
10.,
but
there
are
some
scenarios
users
want
to
to
separate
them
and
to
provide
more
customization
Etc.
So
this
cap
is
basically
for
that.
So
I'll
be
volunteering
to
reveal
this.
So
basically,
this
is
still
a
raw
list
of
the
caps
we're
going
to
have
128.
A
D
A
D
D
I
want
to
be
the
only
one
in
that
topology
domain
right.
So
what
would?
How
would
you
do
that?
You
say:
okay,
I
will
install
I,
will
add
a
pod
Affinity
to
myself
right
and
anti-affinity
against
all
others
yeah,
and
the
way
that
you
do
anti-affinity
against
all
others
is
by
saying
anyone
has,
for
example,
job
name
set
that
should
be
excluded
right,
shouldn't
shouldn't
it
shouldn't
collocate,
but
then
that
but
I
myself
has
that.
D
It's
a
bit
complicated,
not
to
straightforward
to
think
about,
but
I
was
looking
at
the
implementation
for
match,
label
keys
and
it's
basically
it's
only
about
the
like.
Basically
the
operator
in.
That's
it
that's
what
it
supports
right
like
if
you
have
an
anti-affinity
or
Affinity
that
says
so
that
sets
the
match
label
key.
We
add
constraint
that
says:
label
equal
myself
right,
that's
it!
D
I
guess
this
can
be
yeah
I,
don't
know
like
I
need
to
look
closely
at
the
API
if
it
is
possible
to
actually
specify
such
a
thing
like
you
set
match,
label
keys
to
the
label
key
and
then
at
the
same
time
set
the
operator
and
the
operator
would
decide,
but
I
don't
think
we
have
that
level
right.
Like
of
because
imagine
we.