Skip to content

docs: add design for priority-based in-quota reclaim - #2092

Open
davidLif wants to merge 11 commits into
mainfrom
DavidL/highPriorityReclaimsLowInQuota
Open

docs: add design for priority-based in-quota reclaim#2092
davidLif wants to merge 11 commits into
mainfrom
DavidL/highPriorityReclaimsLowInQuota

Conversation

@davidLif

@davidLif davidLif commented Aug 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Description

[](docs: add design for priority-based in-quota reclaim)

Related Issues

Fixes #2065

Checklist

Note: Ensure your PR title follows the Conventional Commits format (e.g., feat(scheduler): add new feature)

  • Self-reviewed
  • Added/updated tests (if needed)
  • Updated documentation (if needed)
  • Added a changelog fragment via make changelog (or applied the skip-changelog label). Do not edit CHANGELOG.md directly — pending fragments are folded into it at release time.

Breaking Changes

Additional Notes

@davidLif
davidLif force-pushed the DavidL/highPriorityReclaimsLowInQuota branch 3 times, most recently from e998c6b to 764dfc8 Compare August 26, 2026 14:23
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
… docs

Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
@davidLif
davidLif force-pushed the DavidL/highPriorityReclaimsLowInQuota branch from 1b4c488 to b8d31f3 Compare August 30, 2026 19:37

## 3. Reclaim Rules

A candidate victim task is reclaimable via the new path when, for the (leveled) reclaimer queue and victim queue pair:

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Clarify "leveled" here

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I meant as per the normalization of priority level of non-siblings queues. Will remove.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Updated


```

## 4. No Reclaim Loops

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What about cascading?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I m not sure why adding "why no cascading reclaims" will help this design doc.

In short, the explanation is:
Everything is in quota so the other stratgies are not interesting, and if B can reclaim from reclaimer A under the new strategy, B could have used the same victims as A under the new strategy and A wouldn't have reached the specific reclaim simulation


No code change. Consolidation (`pkg/scheduler/actions/consolidation/`) doesn't call into the `proportion` reclaim strategies at all — its victim filter only checks `IsPreemptibleJob()` and active-task count, because its scenario validator (`allPodsReallocated`) requires every evicted victim to be reallocated somewhere; it repacks, it doesn't permanently transfer resources across queues. The quota-protection concern this feature relaxes doesn't apply to consolidation the same way, so today's behavior already covers "applicable to consolidation" without change.

## 7. Edge Cases & Risks

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Feels like a change in such a sensitive area might have more risks

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is actually not that big of a change - the only thing we drop is the quota guarantee, and this is mentioned several times in the docs.

Comment thread docs/developer/designs/priority-based-in-quota-reclaim.md Outdated
Signed-off-by: davidLif <davidshani12@gmail.com>
@davidLif
davidLif enabled auto-merge September 1, 2026 16:45
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[design] design issue to allow reclaim/consolidation from lower priority queues (even within quota)

2 participants