forked from kubernetes/autoscaler
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
Merge pull request kubernetes#4902 from ionos-cloud/PSC-2673/vpa_dele…
…te_pods_enhancement [VPA] KEP-4902: Delete OOM Pods
- Loading branch information
Showing
1 changed file
with
105 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
105 changes: 105 additions & 0 deletions
105
vertical-pod-autoscaler/enhancements/4902-delete-oom-pods/README.md
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,105 @@ | ||
# KEP-4902: Delete OOM Pods | ||
|
||
<!-- toc --> | ||
- [Summary](#summary) | ||
- [Motivation](#motivation) | ||
- [Goals](#goals) | ||
- [Non-Goals](#non-goals) | ||
- [Proposal](#proposal) | ||
- [Design Details](#design-details) | ||
- [Test Plan](#test-plan) | ||
- [Implementation History](#implementation-history) | ||
- [Alternatives](#alternatives) | ||
- [Update the eviction API](#update-the-eviction-api) | ||
<!-- /toc --> | ||
|
||
## Summary | ||
|
||
The default behaviour of VPA Updater is to evict Pods when new resource | ||
recommendations are available. This works fine for most cases. | ||
A problem that can arise is when there are multiple replicas and a | ||
PodDisruptionBudget (PDB) which allows one disruption. Now the eviction is at | ||
risk, because as soon as multiple replicas run into for example the memory | ||
limit and get killed they will never recover as the eviciton API will not allow | ||
any further disruptions. | ||
|
||
This proposal addresses the problem by allowing users to enable the deletion of | ||
OOMing pods as a backup if the eviction fails. | ||
|
||
## Motivation | ||
|
||
The motivation behind the change is to give VPA users a way to recover a | ||
failing deployment, if updated/increased limits would solve the problem. | ||
|
||
### Goals | ||
|
||
- Main: allow cluster administrators and other users to enable deletion of pods | ||
|
||
### Non-Goals | ||
|
||
- Get rid of or work around the existing eviction behaviour | ||
|
||
## Proposal | ||
|
||
The proposal is to add a new field to the VPA resource and a global flag. | ||
|
||
A new global flag (`--delete-ooming-on-eviction-error`) shall be added to the | ||
VPA updater to enable the new feature globally. | ||
|
||
Additionally a new field in the VPA resource | ||
(`Spec.UpdatePolicy.DeleteOomingOnEvictionError `) which takes precedence to | ||
the global flag. When unset the value of the flag is taken. This allows cluster | ||
administrators to enable the flag for all VPA resources and at the same time | ||
disable it again for specific deployments, or only enable it for specific | ||
deployments. | ||
|
||
This should give users the most flexible way of configuring this feature to | ||
fit their needs. | ||
|
||
## Design Details | ||
|
||
When the eviction fails the pod will not just get blindy deleted, but further | ||
checks will occur. Which gives us the following checklist: | ||
- [ ] Was at least one container in the Pod terminated due to being OOM | ||
(`OOMKilled`)? | ||
- [ ] Is at least one container in the Pod currently waiting due to being in | ||
`CrashLoopBackOff`? | ||
|
||
Additionally deletion should only occur when an OOM event was recorded and if | ||
it is planned to actually increase the memory limit. Those information are | ||
already present in the updater, they just need to be made available. | ||
|
||
This should make sure to not accidentally disrupt deployments as they might | ||
still heal to a point where eviction then might be possible. | ||
|
||
Suggested implementation is present in [PR | ||
4898](https://github.com/kubernetes/autoscaler/pull/4898). | ||
|
||
### Test Plan | ||
|
||
Add unit tests that cover the new code paths. | ||
|
||
|
||
## Implementation History | ||
|
||
- 2022-05-19: initial version | ||
|
||
## Alternatives | ||
|
||
### Update the eviction API | ||
|
||
Instead of implementing this change on the client side, the VPA in this case, | ||
it could be implemented on the API side. This would have the advantage that it | ||
would work for all clients. On the other hand this would introduce breaking | ||
behaviour and most likely would result in a new api version. | ||
|
||
Another possibility would be to allow the eviction of disrupted workloads, but | ||
this might be hard to decide for the API. | ||
It would need to allow the eviction if the container is currently not running. | ||
This could be introduced as an additional flag in the PDB, to allow this | ||
behaviour. | ||
|
||
Also according to some discussions the general stance seems to be: | ||
If you don't like the drain/evict behaviour, just use delete. | ||
(https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/72320, | ||
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/105296) |