Automatic merge from submit-queue
Add missing new line after "No events."
**What this PR does / why we need it**: Make `kubectl describe` output pretty again.
**Special notes for your reviewer**: Should probably get rolled into the release branch.
**Release note**:
<!-- Steps to write your release note:
1. Use the release-note-* labels to set the release note state (if you have access)
2. Enter your extended release note in the below block; leaving it blank means using the PR title as the release note. If no release note is required, just write `NONE`.
-->
```release-note
NONE
```
Automatic merge from submit-queue
update taints e2e, restrict taints operation with key, effect
Since taints are now unique by key, effect on a node, this PR is to restrict existing taints adding/removing/updating operations in taints e2e.
Also fixes https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/31066#issuecomment-242870101
Related prior Issue/PR #29362 and #30590
Automatic merge from submit-queue
kubectl: display ExternalName for services
User-visible part of https://github.com/kubernetes/features/issues/33
Also add ExternalIPs in `describe`
cc @thockin @smarterclayton
1. When overlapping deployments are discovered, annotate them
2. Expose those overlapping annotations as warnings in kubectl describe
3. Only respect the earliest updated one (skip syncing all other overlapping deployments)
4. Use indexer instead of store for deployment lister
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Fix kubectl describe to display a container's resource limit env vars as node allocatable when the limits are not set
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Use `CreatedByAnnotation` constant
A nit but didn't want the strings to get out of sync.
Signed-off-by: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
Automatic merge from submit-queue
[Refactor] Make QoS naming consistent across the codebase
@derekwaynecarr @vishh PTAL. Can one of you please attach a LGTM.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
kubectl describe node is allocatable aware
`kubectl describe node` will render node.status.allocatable if present.
in addition, it will report allocated resources relative to node.status.allocatable if present instead of capacity.
old code was confusing if you setup system-reserved and kube-reserved as allocated resource percentages were relative to node capacity and not schedulable amount of resources.
this is a small but valuable usability improvement, so i think it would be good to make 1.3 milestone.
/cc @kubernetes/sig-node @kubernetes/rh-cluster-infra @kubernetes/kubectl @davidopp
Fixes#21526
Also test wide outputs. We only guarantee the first IP to be fully printed
if multiple ingresses are present. For AWS, which has no ingress IPs, but
only hostnames, the ELB hostname will be truncated, unless -o=wide is
specified.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Stabilize map order in kubectl describe
Refs #25251.
Add `SortedResourceNames()` methods to map type aliases in order to achieve stable output order for `kubectl` descriptors.
This affects QoS classes, resource limits, and resource requests.
A few remarks:
1. I couldn't find map usages for described fields other than the ones mentioned above. Then again, I failed to identify those programmatically/systematically. Pointers given, I'd be happy to cover any gaps within this PR or along additional ones.
1. It's somewhat difficult to deterministically test a function that brings reliable ordering to Go maps due to its randomizing nature. None of the possibilities I came up with (rely a "probabilistic testing" against repeatedly created maps, add complexity through additional interfaces) seemed very appealing to me, so I went with testing my `sort.Interface` implementation and the changed logic in `kubectl.describeContainers()`.
1. It's apparently not possible to implement a single function that sorts any map's keys generically in Go without producing lots of boilerplate: a `map[<key type>]interface{}` is different from any other map type and thus requires explicit iteration on the caller site to convert back and forth. Unfortunately, this makes it hard to completely avoid code/test duplication.
Please let me know what you think.
