**can the following be done : **
VPA relies on a number of different
measurements and is different from the HPA. We can
therefore use VPA without interference in relation to the HPA.
For a truly efficient scaling, the HPA and VPA complement
each other. HPA creates new replicas if the load raises. If the
space for these replicas is not sufficient, VPA will provide
some nodes, allowing HPA-made pods to run
can it use the same metrics? if we use metrics will both of it execute or do we need to define different metrics for both?
I would also like to clarify one thing:
If the space for these replicas is not sufficient, VPA will provide some nodes, allowing HPA-made pods to run
If the number of nodes provided changes, it is horizontal scaling. Vertical scaling would mean changing the resource capacity of a node like number of cpus or amount of memory.
As for VPA working with HPA:
No, According to this article:
Avoid using HPA and VPA in tandem
HPA and VPA are currently incompatible and a best practice is to avoid
using both together for the same set of pods. VPA can however be used
with HPA that is configured to use either external or custom metrics.
AFAIK, k8s is better suited for HPA. K8s documentation also has HPA page.
Related
I have a k8s cluster in GKE with node autoscaler turned on. I want to maximize the resource utilization, and have applied all the suggestion on requests/limit changes recommended by GKE. At this moment there is 4 nodes as shown in the image below. They all uses n2-standard-2 i.e. 4 GB of memory per vCPU.
Memory request to allocatable ration is quite high compared to CPU request/allocatable.
Wondering if any other machine machine type that better suits my case. or any other resource optimization recommendation?
In GKE You can select custom compute sizes.
We find most workloads work best in 1:4 vCPU to Memory ratio (Hence the default). But it's possible to support other workload types. For your workload it looks like 1:2 for vCPU to Memory would be appropriate.
Also, it's hard to know exactly what sort of resource limit to set. You should look into generating some load for your cluster and using VPA to get a suggestion made by GKE cluster to be able to right size the limits.
Im looking to scale my pods/nodes based on disk space. Is it possible? I see that i can scale based on cpu or memory, but how can i scale based on disk usage?
Yes, you can use a tool named Keda, basically, it gives you the option to scale based on anything.
Here is an example of scaling based on the sum of HTTP requests to your service; Keda will take the number directly from prometheus.
So yes you can scale pods based on disk space if you know which metrics to use
I'd like to run the kubernetes cluster autoscaler so that unneeded nodes will be removed automatically, but I don't want the autoscaler to add nodes automatically. I prefer to handle scaling up myself. Is this possible?
I found maxNodesTotal, but I worry the semantics of setting this to 0 might mean all my nodes will go away. I also found scaleDownEnabled, but no corresponding option for scaling up.
Kubernetes Cluster Autoscaler or CA will attempt scale up whenever it will identify pending pods waiting to be scheduled to run but request more resources(CPU/RAM) than any available node can serve.
You can use the parameter maxNodeTotal to limit the maximum number of nodes CA would be allowed to spin up.
For example if you don't want your cluster to consist of any more than 3 nodes during peak utlization than you would set maxNodeTotal to 3.
There are different considerations that you should be aware of in terms of cost savings, performance and availability.
I would try to list some related to cost savings and efficient utilization as I suspect you might be more interested in that aspect.
Make sure you size your pods in consistency to their actual utlization, because scale up would get triggered by Pods resource request and not actual Pod resource utilization.
Also, bigger Pods are less likely to fit together on the same node, and in addition CA won't be able to scale down any semi-utilised nodes, resulting in resource spending.
Since you tagged this question with EKS, I will assume you are on AWS. On AWS the ASG (Auto Scaling Group) for each NodeGroup has a Max setting that is honoured by the cluster autoscaler. You can set this to prevent scaling above the set number of nodes. If the Min and Max on the ASG are the same value, then the autoscaler will never scale up or down. If the Min and Max are different, then the autoscaler can scale both up and down between those number of nodes. This is not exactly "never scale up", but it limits the upper end.
If you have multiple NodeGroups (ASGs), then each one can have different Min and Max nodes values.
You can also configure the cluster autoscaler itself in different ways. For example, you can set the utilization threshold. If a node's utilization fall under this threshold then the cluster autoscaler considers the node for scale down. See the FAQ.
The FAQ entry above that one may also apply. You can add an annotation to any node you do not want considered for scale down by the cluster autoscaler. Set: kubectl annotate node <nodename> cluster-autoscaler.kubernetes.io/scale-down-disabled=true or annotate the nodes as they are created. You can do this with entries in your AWS node group setup.
We have configured to use 2 metrics for HPA
CPU Utilization
App specific custom metrics
When testing, we observed the scaling happening, but calculation of no.of replicas is not very clear. I am not able to locate any documentation on this.
Questions:
Can someone point to documentation or code on the calculation part?
Is it a good practice to use multiple metrics for scaling?
Thanks in Advance!
From https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/run-application/horizontal-pod-autoscale/#how-does-the-horizontal-pod-autoscaler-work
If multiple metrics are specified in a HorizontalPodAutoscaler, this calculation is done for each metric, and then the largest of the desired replica counts is chosen. If any of those metrics cannot be converted into a desired replica count (e.g. due to an error fetching the metrics from the metrics APIs), scaling is skipped.
Finally, just before HPA scales the target, the scale recommendation is recorded. The controller considers all recommendations within a configurable window choosing the highest recommendation from within that window. This value can be configured using the --horizontal-pod-autoscaler-downscale-stabilization-window flag, which defaults to 5 minutes. This means that scaledowns will occur gradually, smoothing out the impact of rapidly fluctuating metric values
In Kubernetes, I am a little unclear of what criteria needs to be met for open-faas to scale a function's replicas up or down.
According to the documentation:
Auto-scaling in OpenFaaS allows a function to scale up or down depending on demand represented by different metrics.
It sounds like, by default, a reason for scaling would be requests/second increasing/decreasing.
OpenFaaS ships with a single auto-scaling rule defined in the mounted configuration file for AlertManager. AlertManager reads usage (requests per second) metrics from Prometheus in order to know when to fire an alert to the API Gateway.
And this "alert" sent to the API Gateway would cause a function's replica count to scale up.
I don't see in the documentation, or the AlertManager, where the threshold for requests/second is set to scale up/down at.
My overall questions:
What is the default threshold of requests/second that would cause a scale up?
Is this threshold configurable? If so, how?