Hey! I agree that Option A is the way to go
Cheers Gyula On Tue, Jan 6, 2026 at 11:40 PM Sergio Chong Loo <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Daniel, > > Thanks, just upon a quick read I’d be leaning towards Option A since it > sounds more intuitive. I’ll give it a bit more thought too in case there’s > a a corner case escaping us. Also interested in what others think. > > - Sergio > > > On Jan 6, 2026, at 11:10 AM, Daniel Rossos via dev <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > > Hey everyone, > > > > Starting a discussion about handling suspension behavior in > > FlinkBlueGreenDeployment. Currently, if you set > > spec.template.spec.job.state to suspended in the > FlinkBlueGreenDeployment, > > it triggers a blue-green transition that creates a new suspended > deployment > > - which then fails because the new 'green' pipeline never reaches running > > state. This creates a broken transition. > > > > We're considering two options: > > > > *Option A*: Suspend child FlinkDeployments in place > > > > State changes to spec.template.spec.job.state trigger in-place suspension > > of the active child > > While suspended, all blue-green transitions are ignored until spec is set > > back to running > > Once running again, spins up new deployment with any accumulated spec > > changes and resumes normal blue-green operations > > > > *Option B*: Ignore state updates to child FlinkDeployment specs > > Simply ignores any spec.template.spec.job.state changes users attempt at > > the parent level > > Most minimal code change but completely prevents suspension from the > > blue-green level > > > > Tangential on whatever decision comes out of how we suspend blue-green > > deployments, would be worthwhile to consider if we have ‘suspended’ be a > > first class status / field in the top-level FlinkBlueGreenDeployment CR. > > > > We favour Option A which allows for a top-level method for suspending the > > FlinkBlueGreenDeployment pipeline, but would love to hear thoughts on > which > > approach makes more sense or if there are other patterns that have been > > considered for ‘suspension’ in blue-green pipelines. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Daniel > >
