You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
If a dependent is removed from a workflow, the previously created resource represented by that dependent needs to be cleaned up. This can happen before the actual workflow is executed.
This could be done automatically before a workflow is executed, although it is not trivial in general. There are two problems:
If a dependent is removed, on startup the informer related to its type might not be added anymore. So we would need to mark somewhere (maybe status or annotation?) the GVk-s of resources managed.
If there are multiple resources of the same type in general it is not easy to identify which resource belongs to which dependent resource - without calling getSecondaryResource on the dependent. Since this cleanup would happen before the dependents are reconciled this is not doable without imposing additional requirements on implementation: for example, if the id of the resource is calculated based on the desired state, the desired state calculation might depend on other resources (which might not be reconciled now).
Fortunately, this problem can be solved simply just by adding the name of the dependent as an annotation to the resource so it can be identified easily.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
If a dependent is removed from a workflow, the previously created resource represented by that dependent needs to be cleaned up. This can happen before the actual workflow is executed.
This could be done automatically before a workflow is executed, although it is not trivial in general. There are two problems:
If a dependent is removed, on startup the informer related to its type might not be added anymore. So we would need to mark somewhere (maybe status or annotation?) the GVk-s of resources managed.
If there are multiple resources of the same type in general it is not easy to identify which resource belongs to which dependent resource - without calling
getSecondaryResource
on the dependent. Since this cleanup would happen before the dependents are reconciled this is not doable without imposing additional requirements on implementation: for example, if the id of the resource is calculated based on the desired state, the desired state calculation might depend on other resources (which might not be reconciled now).Fortunately, this problem can be solved simply just by adding the name of the dependent as an annotation to the resource so it can be identified easily.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: