Add view for DaemonSets

[2opremio]

Just like we have for PODs, Services, ReplicaSets and Deployments.

[rade]

We are now running quite a few DaemonSets in Weave Cloud, which are currently invisible.

Related, I do wonder whether we need a hybrid view that shows everything at the "highest level of abstractions", i.e. show both Services and DaemonSets, plus individual pods that do not belong to either. All with different iconography, to tell them apart. I guess the issue here would be that in principle pods can belong to multiple higher-level types.

[rade]

I think we should have one view for deployments and daemonsets. AFAIK a pod can never be part of more than one of these. Call that view 'replicas', perhaps. The different types should of course be represented by visually distinct shapes.

The idea here is that we want to look at our system at a level of abstraction that collapses replicas, w/o having to care about / choose / filter-by the specific kind of abstraction that gave rise to the replicas.

I think ultimately we should include replicasets in this view as well, if they are not part of a deployment. But we can add that later; this would go in the direction of some of the hybrid view ideas from #552.

[ekimekim]

I concur. We can preserve the existing behaviour by adding a multi-select option group for deployments/daemonsets/'bare replicasets'/'bare pods', with the default being 'All Types'

…

On 6 Apr. 2017 06:02, "Matthias Radestock" ***@***.***> wrote: I think we should have *one* view for deployments and daemonsets. AFAIK a pod can never be part of more than one of these. Call that view 'replicas', perhaps. The different types should of course be represented by visually distinct shapes. The idea here is that we want to look at our system at a level of abstraction that collapses replicas, w/o having to care about / choose / filter-by the specific kind of abstraction that gave rise to the replicas. I think ultimately we should include replicasets in this view as well, *if they are not part of a deployment*. But we can add that later; this would go in the direction of some of the hybrid view ideas from #552 <#552>. — You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#1444 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAiyxNflCscN-RcGlSxNpTrxzonm49Fpks5rtOJSgaJpZM4IY7RY> .

[rade]

We can preserve the existing behaviour by adding a multi-select

TooManyKnobsException. YAGNI.