DisruptionReason
status condition isn't propagated for forceful disruptions
#2023
Labels
help wanted
Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines.
kind/bug
Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug.
priority/important-soon
Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release.
triage/accepted
Indicates an issue or PR is ready to be actively worked on.
Description
Observed Behavior:
DisruptionReason
status condition was added to the disruption controller to inform users of the reason that they are seeing NodeClaim disruption directly on the object. We are also planning on using this information to pass details to metric counters so that we can track things like how many pods are disrupted for a given reasonThis condition was added but wasn't added to forceful disruption reasons -- which means we are going to lack information when we delete nodes due to expiration, interruption (AWS), manually terminated, etc.
We should add this reason onto forceful disruptions before we actually initiate the termination of the NodeClaim.
Expected Behavior:
All disruption reasons should cause the
DisruptionReason
status condition to exist on the NodeClaimThe text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: