Just finished reading Nigel Poulton's The Kubernetes Book. I'm left with the question of whether or not a Deployment can specify multiple ReplicaSets.
When I think Deployment, I think of it in the traditional sense of an entire application being deployed. Or is there meant to be a Deployment for each microservice?
apiVersion: apps/v1beta2
kind: Deployment
metadata:
name: hello-deploy
spec:
replicas: 10
selector:
matchLabels:
app: hello-world
minReadySeconds: 10
strategy:
type: RollingUpdate
rollingUpdate:
maxUnavailable: 1
maxSurge: 1
template:
metadata:
labels:
app: hello-world
spec:
containers:
- name: hello-pod
image: nigelpoulton/k8sbook : latest
ports:
- containerPort: 8080
It is meant to be a deployment of each microservice.
You can also manage the quantity of "deployed services" of each microservices type.
So for instance, if you want to deploy Service A (Docker image with an Java service) 5 times, you have a deployment resulting 5 pods. Each pod contains the image of Service A.
If you deploy a new version of this Service A (Docker image with an Java service), Kubernetes is able to do a rolling update and manage the shut down of the old Java service type (the existing pods) and creates 5 new pods with the new Java Service A.2 (a new docker image).
Thus your whole microservices application/infrastructure is build upon multiple deployments. Each generating Kubernetes pods, which are published by Kubernetes services.
A deployment contains a single pod template, and generates one replicaset per revision
The replica sets can be multiple up to a limit of 10 based on the number of updates that have been done using deployment. But only one replicaSet (the latest one) should be showing the number of pods; all other older sets should be showing 0.
We can set revisionHistoryLimit to specify how many old replicaSets we want to retain:
https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/controllers/deployment/#clean-up-policy
Related
Kubernetes Blue-green deployment, I am patching the Kubernetes-application-service to redirect the traffic from app-v1 to app-v2(Behind the load balancer). if any connection is ongoing on during that "patching", will be disconnected? and if not !! how I can test this?
what is the best approach as per you for version deployment with the warm handover(without any connection loss) from app-v1 to app-v2?
The question seems to be about supporting two versions at the same time. That is kind of Canary deployment, which make production traffic to gradually shifting from app-v1 to app-v2.
This could be achieved with:
Allow deployments to have HPA with custom metric that based on number of connections. That is, when it reaches certain number of connections scale up/down.
Allow two deployments at the same time, app-v1 and app-v2.
Allow new traffic to route on new deployment via some Ingress annotation, but still keeping access to the old version, so no existing connection be dropped.
Now, all the new requests will be routed to the new version. The HPA eventually, scale down pods from old version. (You can even allow deployment to have zero replicas).
Addition to your question above blue-green deployments.
The blue-green deployment is about having two identical environments, where one environment active at a time, let's say blue is active on production now. Once you have a new version ready for deployment, say green, is deployed and tested separately. Finally, you switched the traffic to the green environment, when you are happy with the test result on green environment. So green become active while blue become idle or terminated later sometime.
(Referred from martin fowler article).
In Kubernetes, this can be achieved with having two identical deployments. Here is a good reference.
Basically, you can have two identical deployments, assume you have current deployment my-deployment-blue is on production. Once you are ready with the new version, you can deploy it as a completely new deployment, lets say my-deployment-green, and use a separate test service to test the green environment. Finally, switch the traffic to the my-deployment-green when all test are passed.
If you are trying to achieve Blue/Green in Kubernetes then my answer might help you.
Do a rolling update by setting the following configuration
maxUnavailable = 0
maxSurge = 100%
How?
The deployment controller first scales the latest version up to 100% of the obsolete version. Once the latest version is healthy, it immediately scales the obsolete version down to 0%.
Example Code:
kind: Deployment
metadata:
name: nginx-deployment
labels:
app: nginx
spec:
replicas: 3
selector:
matchLabels:
app: nginx
template:
metadata:
labels:
app: nginx
spec:
containers:
- name: nginx
image: nginx:1.14.2
ports:
- containerPort: 80
strategy:
rollingUpdate:
maxSurge: 100%
maxUnavailable: 0
type: RollingUpdate
Is there a way we can have a K8s pod per user/per firm? I realise, per user/per firm grouping is mixing up the business level semantics with infrastructure but say I had this need for regulatory reasons, etc to keep things separate. Then is there a way to create a pod on the fly when a user logs in for the first time and hold this pod reference and route any further requests to the relevant pod which will host a set of containers each running an instance of one of the modules.
Is this even possible?
If possible, what are those identifiers that
can be injected into the pod on the fly that I could use to identify that this is
USER-A-POD vs USER_B_POD or FIRM_A_POD vs FIRM_B_POD ?
Effectively, I need to have a pod template that helps me create identical pods of 1 replica but the only way they differ is they are serving traffic related to one user/one firm only.
Generally, if you want to send traffic to a specific pod say from a Kubernetes Service you would use Labels and Selectors. For example, using the selector app: usera-app in the Service:
apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
name: usera-service
spec:
selector:
app: usera-app
ports:
- protocol: TCP
port: 80
targetPort: 80
Then say if the Deployment for your pods, using the label app: usera-app:
apiVersion: apps/v1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
name: usera-deployment
spec:
selector:
matchLabels:
app: usera-app
replicas: 2
template:
metadata:
labels:
app: usera-app
spec:
containers:
- name: myservice
image: nginx
ports:
- containerPort: 80
More info here
How you assign your pods and deployments is up to you and whatever configuration you may use. If you'd like to force create some of the labels in deployments/pods you can take a look at MutatingAdminssionWebhooks.
If you are looking at projects to facilitate all this you can take a look at:
Gatekeeper which is an implementation of the Open Policy Agent for Kubernetes admission. (Still in alpha as of this writing)
Other tools that can help you with attestation and admission mechanism (would have to be adapted for labels):
Kritis
Portieris
Yes, you can create multiple virtual clusters for each user with namespaces.
https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/namespaces/
Namespaces are the way to divide cluster between users.
I'm hosting an application on the Google Cloud Platform via Kubernetes, and I've managed to set up this continuous deployment pipeline:
Application code is updated
New Docker image is automatically generated
K8s Deployment is automatically updated to use the new image
This works great, except for one issue - the deployment always seems to have only one pod. Because of this, when the next update cycle comes around, the entire application goes down, which is unacceptable.
I've tried modifying the YAML of the deployment to increase the number of replicas, and it works... until the next image update, where it gets reset back to one pod again.
This is the command I use to update the image deployment:
set image deployment foo-server gcp-cd-foo-server-sha256=gcr.io/project-name/gcp-cd-foo-server:$REVISION_ID
You can use this command if you dont want to edit deployment yaml file:
kubectl scale deployment foo-server --replicas=2
Also, look at update strategy with maxUnavailable and maxsurge properties.
In your orgional deployment.yml file keep the replicas to 2 or more, othervise you cant avoid down time if only one pod is running and you are going to re-deploy/upgrade etc.
Deployment with 3 replicas( example):
apiVersion: apps/v1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
name: nginx-deployment
labels:
app: nginx
spec:
replicas: 3
selector:
matchLabels:
app: nginx
template:
metadata:
labels:
app: nginx
spec:
containers:
- name: nginx
image: nginx:1.7.9
ports:
- containerPort: 80
Deployment can ensure that only a certain number of Pods may be down
while they are being updated. By default, it ensures that at least 25%
less than the desired number of Pods are up (25% max unavailable).
Deployment can also ensure that only a certain number of Pods may be
created above the desired number of Pods. By default, it ensures that
at most 25% more than the desired number of Pods are up (25% max
surge).
https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/workloads/controllers/deployment/
Nevermind, I had just set up my deployments wrong - had something to do with using the GCP user interface to create the deployments rather than console commands. I created the deployments with kubectl run app --image ... instead and it works now.
I'm trying to understand why kubernetes docs recommend to specify service before deployment in one configuration file:
The resources will be created in the order they appear in the file. Therefore, it’s best to specify the service first, since that will ensure the scheduler can spread the pods associated with the service as they are created by the controller(s), such as Deployment.
Does it mean spread pods between kubernetes cluster nodes?
I tested with the following configuration where a deployment is located before a service and pods are distributed between nods without any issues.
apiVersion: apps/v1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
name: incorrect-order
namespace: test
spec:
selector:
matchLabels:
app: incorrect-order
replicas: 2
template:
metadata:
labels:
app: incorrect-order
spec:
containers:
- name: incorrect-order
image: nginx
ports:
- containerPort: 80
---
apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
name: incorrect-order
namespace: test
labels:
app: incorrect-order
spec:
type: NodePort
ports:
- port: 80
selector:
app: incorrect-order
Another explanation is that some environment variables with service URL will not be set for pods in this case. However it also works ok in case a configuration is inside one file like the example above.
Could you please explain why it is better to specify service before the deployment in case of one configuration file? Or may be it is some outdated recommendation.
If you use DNS as service discovery, the order of creation doesn't matter.
In case of Environment Vars (the second way K8S offers service discovery) the order matters, because once that vars are passed to the starting pod, they cannot be modified later if the service definition changes.
So if your service is deployed before you start your pod, the service envvars are injected inside the linked pod.
If you create a Pod/Deployment resource with labels, this resource will be exposed through a service once this last is created (with proper selector to indicate what resource to expose).
You are correct in that it effects the spread among the worker nodes.
Deployments without a Service will simply be scheduled onto the nodes with the least cpu/memory allocation. For instance, a brand new and empty node will get all new pods from a new deployment.
With a Deployment that also has a service the Scheduler tries to spread the pods between nodes, disregarding the cpu/memory load (within limits), to help the Service survive better.
It puzzles me that a Deployment on it's own doesn't cause a optimal spread but it doesn't, not yet at least.
This is the answer from the official documentation:
The resources will be created in the order they appear in the file.
Therefore, it's best to specify the service first, since that will
ensure the scheduler can spread the pods associated with the service
as they are created by the controller(s), such as Deployment.
Kubernetes Documentation/Concepts/Cluster/Administration/Managing Resources
I would like to deploy an application cluster by managing my deployment via k8s Deployment object. The documentation has me extremely confused. My basic layout has the following components that scale independently:
API server
UI server
Redis cache
Timer/Scheduled task server
Technically, all 4 above belong in separate pods that are scaled independently.
My questions are:
Do I need to create pod.yml files and then somehow reference them in deployment.yml file or can a deployment file also embed pod definitions?
K8s documentation seems to imply that the spec portion of Deployment is equivalent to defining one pod. Is that correct? What if I want to declaratively describe multi-pod deployments? Do I do need multiple deployment.yml files?
Pagids answer has most of the basics. You should create 4 Deployments for your scenario. Each deployment will create a ReplicaSet that schedules and supervises the collection of PODs for the Deployment.
Each Deployment will most likely also require a Service in front of it for access. I usually create a single yaml file that has a Deployment and the corresponding Service in it. Here is an example for an nginx.yaml that I use:
apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
annotations:
service.alpha.kubernetes.io/tolerate-unready-endpoints: "true"
name: nginx
labels:
app: nginx
spec:
type: NodePort
ports:
- port: 80
name: nginx
targetPort: 80
nodePort: 32756
selector:
app: nginx
---
apiVersion: extensions/v1beta1
kind: Deployment
metadata:
name: nginxdeployment
spec:
replicas: 3
template:
metadata:
labels:
app: nginx
spec:
containers:
- name: nginxcontainer
image: nginx:latest
imagePullPolicy: Always
ports:
- containerPort: 80
Here some additional information for clarification:
A POD is not a scalable unit. A Deployment that schedules PODs is.
A Deployment is meant to represent a single group of PODs fulfilling a single purpose together.
You can have many Deployments work together in the virtual network of the cluster.
For accessing a Deployment that may consist of many PODs running on different nodes you have to create a Service.
Deployments are meant to contain stateless services. If you need to store a state you need to create StatefulSet instead (e.g. for a database service).
You can use the Kubernetes API reference for the Deployment and you'll find that the spec->template field is of type PodTemplateSpec along with the related comment (Template describes the pods that will be created.) it answers you questions. A longer description can of course be found in the Deployment user guide.
To answer your questions...
1) The Pods are managed by the Deployment and defining them separately doesn't make sense as they are created on demand by the Deployment. Keep in mind that there might be more replicas of the same pod type.
2) For each of the applications in your list, you'd have to define one Deployment - which also makes sense when it comes to difference replica counts and application rollouts.
3) you haven't asked that but it's related - along with separate Deployments each of your applications will also need a dedicated Service so the others can access it.
additional information:
API server use deployment
UI server use deployment
Redis cache use statefulset
Timer/Scheduled task server maybe use a statefulset (If your service has some state in)