[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YUNIKORN-1693?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17712841#comment-17712841
]
Wei Huang commented on YUNIKORN-1693:
-------------------------------------
That's correct and that's why I mentioned it would be a UX enhancement for envs
that deploys YK as a static pod - which is common for in-house k8s clusters.
I think practically I can stick to having duplicated kubeConfig strings in my
local env. But if you're ok with improving it, I can take a stab and evaluate
the size of code changes. Or, let me know if you don't think it's worth it.
> plugin mode should reuse kubeConfig from scheduler framework handle
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: YUNIKORN-1693
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/YUNIKORN-1693
> Project: Apache YuniKorn
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: shim - kubernetes
> Reporter: Wei Huang
> Priority: Minor
>
> In the plugin mode, the scheduler framework handle provides a
> {{KubeConfig()}} function to expose a pre-built {{*rest.Config}}, which is
> not used in the current implementation. Instead, shim reads the kubeConfig
> string and constructs {{*rest.Config}} anyways.
> In terms of performance (re-use the same {{*rest.Config}}) and simplifying
> user configuration, can we enhance the current impl. to leverage
> {{hanlde.KubeConfig()}}?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
