Skip to content

fix zones match #6431

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

whitewindmills
Copy link
Member

What type of PR is this?
/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
For clusters across multiple AZs, should we relax the restrictions so that as long as there is a matching zone attribute, the cluster can be used as a scheduling candidate cluster? Otherwise, the scheduling results cannot be calculated in many scenarios.
111

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label Jun 6, 2025
@karmada-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from whitewindmills. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@karmada-bot karmada-bot added the size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jun 6, 2025
@whitewindmills
Copy link
Member Author

/cc @RainbowMango

@karmada-bot karmada-bot requested a review from RainbowMango June 6, 2025 10:08
@RainbowMango RainbowMango added this to the v1.15 milestone Jun 6, 2025
@XiShanYongYe-Chang
Copy link
Member

Hi @whitewindmills, the UT has failed.

Signed-off-by: whitewindmills <[email protected]>
@karmada-bot karmada-bot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jun 9, 2025
@whitewindmills
Copy link
Member Author

Hi @whitewindmills, the UT has failed.

thanks, fixed.

@codecov-commenter
Copy link

⚠️ Please install the 'codecov app svg image' to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 66.66667% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 49.05%. Comparing base (721b472) to head (a33653d).
Report is 4 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
pkg/util/selector.go 66.66% 1 Missing ⚠️

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6431      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   49.05%   49.05%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         687      687              
  Lines       56058    56061       +3     
==========================================
- Hits        27500    27499       -1     
- Misses      26777    26780       +3     
- Partials     1781     1782       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 49.05% <66.66%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

@whitewindmills
Copy link
Member Author

seems to be unrelated test cases.
/retest

Copy link
Member

@RainbowMango RainbowMango left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/assign

@RainbowMango
Copy link
Member

// 1. When the operator is "In", zoneMatchExpression must contain all zones, otherwise it doesn't match.

This PR looks good to me. But this comment shows the previous behavior was in line with expectations and was not a bug.

Can you remind me why it was designed this way before?

@whitewindmills
Copy link
Member Author

But this comment shows the previous behavior was in line with expectations and was not a bug.

Maybe I had not considered the actual usage scenario at that time.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants