Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

apimachinery: unify accessors to not deepcopy #64915

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Jun 20, 2018
Merged

apimachinery: unify accessors to not deepcopy #64915

merged 1 commit into from Jun 20, 2018

Conversation

sttts
Copy link
Contributor

@sttts sttts commented Jun 8, 2018 •
edited

The Get/SetOwnerReferences accessor funcs do deepcopies, in contrast to all other accessor funcs of metav1.ObjectMeta. For unstructured.Unstructured we naturally do deepcopies.

In other words: the interface does guarantee neither the first nor the second.

This PR documents this and remove the unneccessary deepcopy for owner references (which leads to huge heap allocation e.g. in the DaemonSet controller).

This is for post-1.11. do not assign a milestone.

The metav1.ObjectMeta accessor does not deepcopy owner references anymore. In general, the accessor interface does not enforce deepcopy nor does it forbid it (e.g. for unstructured.Unstructured).

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sttts: Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Jun 8, 2018
@sttts sttts added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Jun 8, 2018
@mfojtik
Copy link
Contributor

mfojtik commented Jun 8, 2018

@smarterclayton found during debugging starter mem leaks ;-)

@mfojtik mfojtik mentioned this pull request Jun 8, 2018
Merged
@soltysh
Copy link
Contributor

soltysh commented Jun 8, 2018

I wonder if this is also related to #64137 as well

soltysh
soltysh approved these changes Jun 8, 2018
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@soltysh soltysh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 8, 2018
@sttts sttts changed the title apimachinery: unify accessors to not deepcopy WIP: apimachinery: unify accessors to not deepcopy Jun 8, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sttts: Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. and removed release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Jun 8, 2018
@sttts
Copy link
Contributor Author

sttts commented Jun 8, 2018

/retest

@sttts sttts changed the title WIP: apimachinery: unify accessors to not deepcopy apimachinery: unify accessors to not deepcopy Jun 8, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jun 8, 2018
@sttts sttts added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Jun 8, 2018
@mfojtik
Copy link
Contributor

mfojtik commented Jun 8, 2018

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mfojtik, soltysh, sttts

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

The pull request process is described 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

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sttts: Adding the "do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed" label because no release-note block was detected, please follow our release note process to remove it.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. and removed release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Jun 8, 2018
@sttts sttts added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Jun 8, 2018
k8s-github-robot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 11, 2018
Merge pull request #64916 from mfojtik/ds-01-improve-mem-usage
e6f64d0 
Automatic merge from submit-queue. If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/cherry-picks.md">here</a>.

improve memory footprint of daemonset simulate

**What this PR does / why we need it**:

This is an alternative for #64915 (it might be not needed if that PR will merge)

During memory profiling of OpenShift, we noticed a significant amount of object allocations done by `IsControlledBy()`. @sttts found that the `GetObjectReferences()` method is doing a deep-copy of the object references. 

![screen shot 2018-06-08 at 14 22 59](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/44136/41157922-7af953f2-6b27-11e8-9a16-bda8c3edfe07.png)

This PR simplify the `IsControlledBy()` to just iterate over the ownerRefs, without copying them. 

**Release note**:

```release-note
NONE
```
@k8s-github-robot
Copy link

Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 58690, 64773, 64880, 64915, 64831). If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions here.

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot merged commit 1a061a7 into kubernetes:master Jun 20, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@soltysh soltysh soltysh approved these changes

@erictune erictune Awaiting requested review from erictune

@smarterclayton smarterclayton Awaiting requested review from smarterclayton

Assignees

@mfojtik mfojtik

@soltysh soltysh

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@sttts @k8s-ci-robot @mfojtik @soltysh @k8s-github-robot