Add KubeRay e2e Test for custom idleTimeoutSeconds with v2 Autoscaler #2725
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Ryan O'Leary <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ryan O'Leary <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ryan O'Leary <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ryan O'Leary <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Why are these changes needed?
This PR adds a test case for custom
idleTimeoutSecondsper worker group supported by the V2 Autoscaler starting in ray 2.40.0. The test case verifies thatidleTimeoutSecondsfor a worker group override the defaultidleTimeoutSecondsset in theautoscalerOptionsby scaling up replicas of each type and then checking that they are terminated within the expected period.This PR was tested by running
go test -timeout 30m -v ./test/e2eautoscalerwith the nightly version of the KubeRay operator installed, since the change adding this field to the WorkerGroupSpec api is not yet part of a release.Related issue number
#2561
Checks