-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
Update autoscaler CM example block for max-scale-limit #9577
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
Update autoscaler CM example block for max-scale-limit #9577
Conversation
# max-scale-limit ensures that both cluster-wide flag max-scale and per-revision | ||
# annotation "autoscaling.knative.dev/maxScale" for new revision will not exceed | ||
# this number. If max-scale-limit is greater than 0, it disables both explicitly | ||
# setting "autoscaling.knative.dev/maxScale" annotation to 0 and leaving it unset. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I feel like the fact that this affects both the annotation and the config might be implicit. How about:
# max-scale-limit ensures that both cluster-wide flag max-scale and per-revision | |
# annotation "autoscaling.knative.dev/maxScale" for new revision will not exceed | |
# this number. If max-scale-limit is greater than 0, it disables both explicitly | |
# setting "autoscaling.knative.dev/maxScale" annotation to 0 and leaving it unset. | |
# max-scale-limit sets the maximum permitted value for the max scale of a revision. | |
# When this is set to a positive value, a revision with a maxScale above that value | |
# (including a maxScale of "0" = unlimited) is disallowed. | |
# A value of zero (the default) allows any limit, including unlimited. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
Will let someone else approve
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If we're gonna merge the other one, I can approve. If we're going to hold until release — then we should not have this in the release CM :)
Oh yeah good point /hold for release |
bca6931
to
f9e34f6
Compare
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #9577 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 88.35% 88.38% +0.02%
==========================================
Files 193 193
Lines 8632 8632
==========================================
+ Hits 7627 7629 +2
+ Misses 761 760 -1
+ Partials 244 243 -1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: taragu, 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
/hold cancel |
Part of #8628
/hold for #9496
Proposed Changes
Update autoscaler CM example block for max-scale-limit
Release Note
/assign @markusthoemmes @vagababov @julz