dgrove-oss commented on a change in pull request #3338: implement
suspend/resume for KubernetesContainer
URL:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-openwhisk/pull/3338#discussion_r170387260
##########
File path:
core/invoker/src/main/scala/whisk/core/containerpool/kubernetes/KubernetesClient.scala
##########
@@ -99,43 +111,133 @@ class KubernetesClient(
}
protected val kubectlCmd = Seq(findKubectlCmd)
- def run(name: String, image: String, args: Seq[String] = Seq.empty[String])(
- implicit transid: TransactionId): Future[ContainerId] = {
- runCmd(Seq("run", name, s"--image=$image") ++ args, timeouts.run)
- .map(_ => ContainerId(name))
- }
+ def run(name: String,
+ image: String,
+ memory: ByteSize = 256.MB,
+ environment: Map[String, String] = Map(),
+ labels: Map[String, String] = Map())(implicit transid:
TransactionId): Future[KubernetesContainer] = {
+
+ val envVars = environment.map {
+ case (key, value) => new
EnvVarBuilder().withName(key).withValue(value).build()
+ }.toSeq
+
+ val pod = new PodBuilder()
+ .withNewMetadata()
+ .withName(name)
+ .addToLabels("name", name)
+ .addToLabels(mapAsJavaMap(labels))
+ .endMetadata()
+ .withNewSpec()
+ .withRestartPolicy("Always")
+ .addNewContainer()
+ .withNewResources()
+ .withLimits(mapAsJavaMap(Map("memory" -> new Quantity(memory.toMB +
"Mi"))))
+ .endResources()
+ .withName("user-action")
+ .withImage(image)
+ .withEnv(envVars)
+ .addNewPort()
+ .withContainerPort(8080)
+ .withName("action")
+ .endPort()
+ .endContainer()
+ .endSpec()
+ .build()
+
+ kubeRestClient.pods.inNamespace("openwhisk").create(pod)
- def inspectIPAddress(id: ContainerId)(implicit transid: TransactionId):
Future[ContainerAddress] = {
Future {
blocking {
- val pod =
-
kubeRestClient.pods().withName(id.asString).waitUntilReady(timeouts.inspect.length,
timeouts.inspect.unit)
- ContainerAddress(pod.getStatus().getPodIP())
+ val createdPod = kubeRestClient.pods
+ .inNamespace("openwhisk")
+ .withName(name)
+ .waitUntilReady(config.timeouts.run.length, config.timeouts.run.unit)
+ toContainer(createdPod)
}
}.recoverWith {
case e =>
- log.error(this, s"Failed to get IP of Pod '${id.asString}' within
timeout: ${e.getClass} - ${e.getMessage}")
- Future.failed(new Exception(s"Failed to get IP of Pod
'${id.asString}'"))
+ log.error(this, s"Failed create pod for '$name': ${e.getClass} -
${e.getMessage}")
+ Future.failed(new Exception(s"Failed to create pod '$name'"))
}
}
- def rm(id: ContainerId)(implicit transid: TransactionId): Future[Unit] =
- runCmd(Seq("delete", "--now", "pod", id.asString), timeouts.rm).map(_ =>
())
+ def rm(container: KubernetesContainer)(implicit transid: TransactionId):
Future[Unit] = {
+ // Pod deletion will never complete if the pod contains a paused container.
+ // Therefore issue a resume before the delete (resuming a non-suspended
container is harmless).
+ resume(container).map { _ =>
+ runCmd(Seq("delete", "--now", "pod", container.id.asString),
config.timeouts.rm).map(_ => ())
+ }
+ }
- def rm(key: String, value: String)(implicit transid: TransactionId):
Future[Unit] =
- runCmd(Seq("delete", "--now", "pod", "-l", s"$key=$value"),
timeouts.rm).map(_ => ())
+ def rm(key: String, value: String)(implicit transid: TransactionId):
Future[Unit] = {
+ if (config.invokerAgent) {
+ Future {
+ blocking {
+ kubeRestClient
+ .inNamespace("openwhisk")
+ .pods()
+ .withLabel(key, value)
+ .list()
+ .getItems
+ .map { pod =>
+ rm(toContainer(pod))
+ }
+ .reduce((a, b) => a.flatMap(_ => b))
+ }
+ }
+ } else {
+ runCmd(Seq("delete", "--now", "pod", "-l", s"$key=$value"),
config.timeouts.rm).map(_ => ())
+ }
+ }
- def logs(id: ContainerId, sinceTime: Option[Instant], waitForSentinel:
Boolean = false)(
+ def suspend(container: KubernetesContainer)(implicit transid:
TransactionId): Future[Unit] = {
Review comment:
I think the implementations belong in the KubernetesClient, since they need
access to some of its state too (its config object).
I agree passing the entire KubernetesContainer object as a parameter looks a
bit backwards. I decided to do that (instead of passing a few of its fields
individually) as a hedge against future churn and because it felt like a nice
logical unit (vs. passing containerId, workerIP, nativeContainerId). But I
don't feel that strongly about this.
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
With regards,
Apache Git Services
