-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 224
hub/conat: discover via k8s api #8431
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Conversation
afb4112
to
14d3818
Compare
14d3818
to
24308f2
Compare
I tested this in onprem, I get
which looks promising, and there are two routers – but the health check still fails. |
This is a 68MB dependency that is not needed except in kucalc, so there's no way I'm merging this into the main cocalc repo, having spent so much time recently removing packages (about 100): mkdir x
cd x
pnpm init
pnpm i @kubernetes/client-node
du -sch .
--> 68M total The options I can think of:
Personally, I think 2 is the best approach. E.g., regarding manage-* there is no need to keep that code secret, and having it in this repo (and in typescript) would help ensure things stay aligned. What do you think about the above options? Is there another one I'm missing? NOTE: I'm well aware that there is a similar problem in our server package regarding the -- also from Google -- very, very heavy Google cloud api client. It might also make sense to move the compute server api code to a separate package, which only gets built in deployments that will make use of compute servers. We can make cocalc much more lightweight. E.g., this package https://www.npmjs.com/package/@cocalc/compute-server is 32MB, and has everything needed to run the compute server daemon, which includes the @cocalc/project package... |
All that said, even with option 2, this 68MB is still an extra 68MB that has to get copied all over the place whenever any hub gets deployed anywhere. I'm not thrilled about that. |
ee669fc
to
856d7f9
Compare
856d7f9
to
962d24c
Compare
Yes, that's a heavy dependency. I think it's safe to query directly. I'll test that variant tomorrow. |
Thanks! |
ok! the variant where it calls the API directly works in onprem! |
No description provided.