Skip to content
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

Resolved a bug where a pod scheduled during provisioning would cause a waiting goroutine #938

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 9, 2021

Conversation

ellistarn
Copy link
Contributor

@ellistarn ellistarn commented Dec 8, 2021

1. Issue, if available:

2. Description of changes:

  • Filter logic happened before releasing goroutines, so the wrong number of routines were released
  • Simplified the provisioner logic to make it less likely that something like this will recur.

3. Does this change impact docs?

  • Yes, PR includes docs updates
  • Yes, issue opened: link to issue
  • No

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Dec 8, 2021

✔️ Deploy Preview for karpenter-docs-prod canceled.

🔨 Explore the source changes: 52b01d7

🔍 Inspect the deploy log: https://app.netlify.com/sites/karpenter-docs-prod/deploys/61affe299c78d60008b2789a

case p.results <- err: // Block until result is communicated
case <-p.done: // Leave if closed
}
p.wait <- struct{}{}
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Previously, we would filter pods before releasing the threads, which resulted in miscounting when pods were bound.

@ellistarn ellistarn changed the title [WIP] Continued scheduling refactor Resolved a bug where a pod scheduled during provisioning would cause a waiting goroutine Dec 8, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@bwagner5 bwagner5 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

lgtm

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants