Enable setting the resource request/limits via annotations for queue-proxy side-car container #4151

raushan2016 · 2019-05-23T02:22:37Z

…proxy side-car container

Fixes #
#4134

Proposed Changes

Allow setting up the resource request and limits for the proxy-queue via annotations

Release Note

…proxy side-car container

knative-prow-robot

@raushan2016: 0 warnings.

In response to this:

…proxy side-car container

Fixes #
#4134

Proposed Changes

Allow setting up the resource request and limits for the proxy-queue via annotations

Release Note

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

knative-prow-robot · 2019-05-23T02:22:51Z

Hi @raushan2016. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a knative member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

raushan2016 · 2019-05-23T05:31:29Z

@vagababov As per your comments in my last PR, can you help in with your comments.

Where i can add integration test.
How can we fail the configuration crd deployment if someone post a crd with invalid resource quantity in annotation. #Resolved

vagababov · 2019-05-23T07:19:34Z

Hi,
Tests are in ./test/e2e or ./test/conformance. Not sure where this would go.
As for validation, we can validate in the webhook and reject invalid values, though I don't think we do that for annotations right now.

raushan2016 · 2019-05-24T21:19:59Z

Hi,
Tests are in ./test/e2e or ./test/conformance. Not sure where this would go.
As for validation, we can validate in the webhook and reject invalid values, though I don't think we do that for annotations right now.

Added webhook validation.
Sample error:
Error from server (InternalError): error when creating "knativeapp.yaml": Internal error occurred: admission webhook "webhook.serving.knative.dev" denied the request: mutation failed: queue.sidecar.serving.knative.dev/limitCPU=50m is less than queue.sidecar.serving.knative.dev/requestCPU=100m: spec.template.queue.sidecar.serving.knative.dev/limitCPU, spec.template.queue.sidecar.serving.knative.dev/requestCPU

Added the integration test as well

raushan2016 · 2019-05-24T21:25:14Z

/cc @mattmoor #Resolved

raushan2016 · 2019-05-24T21:27:23Z

/cc @mattmoor

As vagababov is on vacation #Resolved

mattmoor · 2019-05-26T23:57:32Z

/hold

As discussed in slack, I have serious reservations about adding 4 annotations for this.

I feel like a more appropriate near-/medium-term solution to this would be to make the queue-proxy's allocation a simple function (e.g. fraction w/ minimum value?) of the user-specified resources. Given documented cases where this simple function is inadequate, I would consider a single annotation to control the fraction on a per-Revision basis, but leaving the gate with 4 annotations is a non-starter.

I feel like (armed with today's knowledge) the most appropriate long-term solution to this is VPA in the autoscaler.

raushan2016 · 2019-05-28T17:13:03Z

/hold

As discussed in slack, I have serious reservations about adding 4 annotations for this.

I feel like a more appropriate near-/medium-term solution to this would be to make the queue-proxy's allocation a simple function (e.g. fraction w/ minimum value?) of the user-specified resources. Given documented cases where this simple function is inadequate, I would consider a single annotation to control the fraction on a per-Revision basis, but leaving the gate with 4 annotations is a non-starter.

I feel like (armed with today's knowledge) the most appropriate long-term solution to this is VPA in the autoscaler.

Thanks for the feedback. Was looking around how to fit in the fraction function. We have a multi-tenant scenario for running machine learning models. Now some models are high in cpu and some are high in memory usage. Do you have suggestions how can I define the function to avoid giving proxy container excess resources. #Resolved

raushan2016 · 2019-05-28T21:11:08Z

/hold
As discussed in slack, I have serious reservations about adding 4 annotations for this.
I feel like a more appropriate near-/medium-term solution to this would be to make the queue-proxy's allocation a simple function (e.g. fraction w/ minimum value?) of the user-specified resources. Given documented cases where this simple function is inadequate, I would consider a single annotation to control the fraction on a per-Revision basis, but leaving the gate with 4 annotations is a non-starter.
I feel like (armed with today's knowledge) the most appropriate long-term solution to this is VPA in the autoscaler.

Thanks for the feedback. Was looking around how to fit in the fraction function. We have a multi-tenant scenario for running machine learning models. Now some models are high in cpu and some are high in memory usage. Do you have suggestions how can I define the function to avoid giving proxy container excess resources.

As discussed over slack https://knative.slack.com/archives/C93E33SN8/p1559064154040200?thread_ts=1558381918.374600&cid=C93E33SN8

Have a annotation for % like 0.03 of user container, With upper and lower bound as safeguard.
request.cpu = 0.03% with [25m, 100m]
limit.cpu = 0.03% with [40m , 500m]
memory.request = 0.03% with [50Mi, 200 Mi]
memory.limit = 0.03% with [200Mi,500Mi] #Resolved

knative-metrics-robot · 2019-06-04T00:58:21Z

The following is the coverage report on pkg/.
Say /test pull-knative-serving-go-coverage to re-run this coverage report

File	Old Coverage	New Coverage	Delta
pkg/apis/serving/v1alpha1/revision_validation.go	89.8%	88.9%	-0.9

pkg/apis/serving/v1alpha1/revision_validation.go

pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/queue.go

pkg/apis/serving/v1alpha1/revision_validation.go

knative-metrics-robot · 2019-06-04T01:42:59Z

The following is the coverage report on pkg/.
Say /test pull-knative-serving-go-coverage to re-run this coverage report

File	Old Coverage	New Coverage	Delta
pkg/apis/serving/v1alpha1/revision_validation.go	89.8%	88.9%	-0.9
pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/queue.go	100.0%	96.4%	-3.6
pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/resourceboundary.go	Do not exist	100.0%

vagababov · 2019-06-04T01:48:21Z

/ok-to-test

knative-metrics-robot · 2019-06-04T01:59:56Z

The following is the coverage report on pkg/.
Say /test pull-knative-serving-go-coverage to re-run this coverage report

File	Old Coverage	New Coverage	Delta
pkg/apis/serving/v1alpha1/revision_validation.go	89.8%	88.9%	-0.9
pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/queue.go	100.0%	96.4%	-3.6
pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/resourceboundary.go	Do not exist	100.0%

knative-metrics-robot · 2019-06-04T02:00:44Z

The following is the coverage report on pkg/.
Say /test pull-knative-serving-go-coverage to re-run this coverage report

File	Old Coverage	New Coverage	Delta
pkg/apis/serving/v1alpha1/revision_validation.go	89.8%	88.9%	-0.9
pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/queue.go	100.0%	96.4%	-3.6
pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/resourceboundary.go	Do not exist	100.0%

mattmoor

/lgtm
/approve

knative-prow-robot · 2019-06-04T02:28:13Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mattmoor, raushan2016, vagababov

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:

~~pkg/apis/OWNERS~~ [mattmoor]
~~pkg/reconciler/OWNERS~~ [mattmoor,vagababov]
~~test/OWNERS~~ [mattmoor,vagababov]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

mattmoor

/lgtm

knative-metrics-robot · 2019-06-04T03:40:29Z

The following is the coverage report on pkg/.
Say /test pull-knative-serving-go-coverage to re-run this coverage report

File	Old Coverage	New Coverage	Delta
pkg/apis/serving/v1alpha1/revision_validation.go	89.8%	88.9%	-0.9
pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/resourceboundary.go	Do not exist	100.0%

mattmoor · 2019-06-04T04:22:42Z

/retest

Move to corev1.PodSpec now that vN-1 supports the containers field. (knative#4221) Previously we defined our own partial PodSpec because the corev1 version lacks `omitempty` and appears as `containers: null` in requests from generated clients, even if unspecified, which would have broken webhook validation. Now that the field has been out for a release, we can switch to the common PodSpec. Scaling Roadmap 2019 (knative#3040) * Scaling 2019 roadmap stub. * Descriptions for all 2019 goals. * Goals, POCs and Github projects for each. * Remove recap (will do later). * Remove indent. * Add Pluggability and HPA line item. * Yanwei as POC for layering. * Update docs/roadmap/scaling-2019.md Co-Authored-By: josephburnett <[email protected]> * Update docs/roadmap/scaling-2019.md Co-Authored-By: josephburnett <[email protected]> * Clarify overload handling for 0 and non-0 cases. * Refactor cold-start goal. * Remove POC. * Autoscaler scalability. * More edits. * HPA Interation. * Minor edits. * Propose section on migration K8s Deployments * Reworked parts of the Scaling roadmap. - Unified some wording (capitalization mostly). - Removed prescriptive key steps. These should be captured by the respective projects, which will be more dynamically changeable than this document. Enable setting the resource request/limits via annotations for queue-proxy side-car container (knative#4151) * Enable setting the resource request/limits via annotations for queue-proxy side-car container * Last PR comments * more * added integration tests * more * testfix * integrationtest * comments * integration test fix * PR comments * more * final * more pr comments * added error ErrInvalidValue * code coverage of queue.go Remove unused constants. (knative#4238) Update DEVELOPMENT.md (knative#4230) Auto TLS landed in v0.6, so this documentation is out of date golang format tools (knative#4241) Produced via: `gofmt -s -w $(find -path './vendor' -prune -o -type f -name '*.go' -print))` `goimports -w $(find -name '*.go' | grep -v vendor)` Move Metric interfaces into the general autoscaling package. (knative#4236) * Move Metric interfaces into the general autoscaling package. This used to be KPA specific but will soon be needed to be used by HPA resources as well to trigger metric collection. Decider interfaces and types stay KPA specific. * Move the Metrics resource interface next to the metric implementation. * Move Deciders interface for consistency. Apply various fixes pointed out by staticcheck. (knative#4242) * Transform string(buf.Bytes()) to buf.String(). * Remove a bunch of unused code. * Fix error capitalization. * Fix issue with error overlapping. * Fix deprecated usage of Apps without version. * Fix file permission resolution. * Fix comparison to boolean. * Fix issue with variable never being used. * Remove unused conditionsets. * Fix error checks after fixing capitalization. * Remove unused values in performance tests. * Remove some more unused code. steadier state Format markdown (knative#4240) Produced via: `prettier --write --prose-wrap=always $(find -name '*.md' | grep -v vendor | grep -v .github)` Drop DeprecatedName from service_test.go (knative#4243) some junk things work

…proxy side-car container (knative#4151) * Enable setting the resource request/limits via annotations for queue-proxy side-car container * Last PR comments * more * added integration tests * more * testfix * integrationtest * comments * integration test fix * PR comments * more * final * more pr comments * added error ErrInvalidValue * code coverage of queue.go

Iamlovingit · 2020-01-09T10:15:53Z

/retest

if i change the pkg/reconciler/revision/resources/resourceboundary.go boundary, but i do not know which image has changed. is queue image? or controller image?

Enable setting the resource request/limits via annotations for queue-…

b8cc9c7

…proxy side-car container

googlebot added the cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CLA. label May 23, 2019

knative-prow-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label May 23, 2019

knative-prow-robot requested review from dprotaso and vagababov May 23, 2019 02:22

knative-prow-robot reviewed May 23, 2019

View reviewed changes

knative-prow-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. area/API API objects and controllers labels May 23, 2019

raushan2016 mentioned this pull request May 23, 2019

Enable setting the resource request/limits via annotations for queue-proxy side-car container #4142

Closed

Last PR comments

d5aac57

raushan2016 added 2 commits May 24, 2019 19:56

more

433afb9

added integration tests

da03c57

knative-prow-robot added the area/test-and-release It flags unit/e2e/conformance/perf test issues for product features label May 24, 2019

knative-prow-robot requested a review from mattmoor May 24, 2019 21:25

mattmoor self-assigned this May 26, 2019

knative-prow-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 26, 2019

more

8d1e47a

knative-prow-robot added size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels May 29, 2019

mattmoor-sockpuppet reviewed May 29, 2019

View reviewed changes

testfix

92eaba5