-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 668
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
Add Namespace filtering to RemoveDuplicates strategy #406
Add Namespace filtering to RemoveDuplicates strategy #406
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: damemi 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 |
1200380
to
be0cc56
Compare
be0cc56
to
b9d73ec
Compare
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.
+1 for parameter tables
README.md
Outdated
@@ -188,8 +206,17 @@ This strategy makes sure that pods violating interpod anti-affinity are removed | |||
if there is podA on a node and podB and podC (running on the same node) have anti-affinity rules which prohibit | |||
them to run on the same node, then podA will be evicted from the node so that podB and podC could run. This | |||
issue could happen, when the anti-affinity rules for podB and podC are created when they are already running on | |||
node. Currently, there are no parameters associated with this strategy. To disable this strategy, the | |||
policy should look like: | |||
node. Currently, there are no parameters associated with this strategy. |
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.
Currently, there are no parameters associated with this strategy.
not necessary here
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.
To disable this strategy, the policy should look like
still applies here unless the example's enabled
field is set to true
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.
updated
b9d73ec
to
1f02d87
Compare
/lgtm Holding for others to LGTM. Feel free to unhold. |
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.
just one nit in README, otherwise LGTM
1f02d87
to
11b9829
Compare
/lgtm |
/lgtm |
/hold cancel |
/kind feature |
…ce-filtering Add Namespace filtering to RemoveDuplicates strategy
Fixes #405
This also adds a
parameters
table to each strategy for a quicker reference at what the params are available