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] Always check the readiness of head Pods for both pending / active clusters if cluster exists #2783

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 21, 2025

Conversation

kevin85421
Copy link
Member

@kevin85421 kevin85421 commented Jan 21, 2025

Why are these changes needed?

Originally, if both active and pending clusters exist, only the head Pod of the pending cluster will have its status checked. That is, if the active cluster's head Pod's serve status fails during the upgrade process, it will not be detected in time.

This PR checks the readiness of head Pods for both pending / active clusters if exist.

Related issue number

Checks

  • I've made sure the tests are passing.
  • Testing Strategy
    • Unit tests
    • Manual tests
    • This PR is not tested :(

Signed-off-by: kaihsun <[email protected]>
@@ -211,9 +222,6 @@ func (r *RayServiceReconciler) Reconcile(ctx context.Context, request ctrl.Reque
if err := r.reconcileServices(ctx, rayServiceInstance, rayClusterInstance, utils.HeadService); err != nil {
return ctrl.Result{RequeueAfter: ServiceDefaultRequeueDuration}, err
}
if err := r.updateHeadPodServeLabel(ctx, rayClusterInstance, rayServiceInstance.Spec.ExcludeHeadPodFromServeSvc); err != nil {
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Originally, if both active and pending clusters exist, only the head Pod of the pending cluster will have its status checked. That is, if the active cluster's head Pod's serve status fails during the upgrade process, it will not be detected in time.

}

if err != nil {
return err
}
logger.Info("reconcileServices", "newSvc", newSvc)
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

very verbose and not that useful

@kevin85421 kevin85421 marked this pull request as ready for review January 21, 2025 03:36
@kevin85421
Copy link
Member Author

cc @rueian

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