Replies: 3 comments 4 replies
-
Hi @fhalde
this is the way to go. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
-
This is what it would look like on a high level. There will be several instances of these workflows running for each CR instance graph TD;
A[CR instance Handler function]-->|On CR CRUD|A;
B[Cluster instance informer]-->|When the referred Cluster object changes|A
C[ConfigMap instance informer]-->|When the referred ConfigMap object changes|A;
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
2 replies
-
is this mainly to do with performance & the number of watches it creates? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Hi there, I'm looking for some guidance on our controller design
We have a controller that manages a CustomResource (CR) which has the following structure
Our controller starts off with a single informer for this CustomResource type.
Each instance of a CR then creates a new informer for each of the Ref's listed in order to react to their changes. This is an informer specifically listening to just 1 object in k8s.
It's expected that the refs will have a high cardinality, so we are expecting a lot of informers created.
My question is, is this an OK level of granularity for setting up informers? I've noticed that each instance of a informer creates a watch & I don't know of its implications.
The other alternative is to create singleton informers for each
apiGroup/kind
( the list of resource "types" we are interested in is well known in advance ) and have a handler that tracks dependencies and routes accordingly ( a router of sorts )Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions