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

[RayService] Unify the cluster switch over logic together #2786

Closed
1 of 2 tasks
Tracked by #2548
kevin85421 opened this issue Jan 21, 2025 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2805
Closed
1 of 2 tasks
Tracked by #2548

[RayService] Unify the cluster switch over logic together #2786

kevin85421 opened this issue Jan 21, 2025 · 2 comments · Fixed by #2805
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@kevin85421
Copy link
Member

kevin85421 commented Jan 21, 2025

Search before asking

  • I had searched in the issues and found no similar feature requirement.

Description

Currently, the cluster switch-over logic is split into four parts:

  • promotePendingClusterToActiveCluster: Sets the RayService status
  • reconcileServices: Switches the head service to the new cluster
  • reconcileServices: Switches the serve service to the new cluster
  • Updates the CR status

However, the dependencies between these parts are not easy to identify. For example, the following logic depends on promotePendingClusterToActiveCluster, but this dependency is not clearly defined.

if newSvc.Spec.Selector[utils.RayClusterLabelKey] == oldSvc.Spec.Selector[utils.RayClusterLabelKey] {

Solution: Unify the logic of setting RayService CR status, update CR status, and switch head / serve svc to the new cluster in a single function.

Use case

No response

Related issues

No response

Are you willing to submit a PR?

  • Yes I am willing to submit a PR!
@kevin85421
Copy link
Member Author

/assign @rueian

@rueian
Copy link
Contributor

rueian commented Jan 22, 2025

🆗

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

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants