Update readiness probe docs to match observed behaviour (#49476)
* Update readiness probe docs to match observed behaviour * Address comment * Reword * Describe endpoint and LB instead of Pod * Address comments * Fix link Co-authored-by: Tim Bannister <tim@scalefactory.com> * Clarify endpoint vs pod conditions * Add more focus on Pod and less on endpoint --------- Co-authored-by: Tim Bannister <tim@scalefactory.com>pull/50782/head
parent
d08348cb42
commit
3cbacc45bb
|
@ -562,10 +562,11 @@ processing its startup data, you might prefer a readiness probe.
|
|||
|
||||
{{< note >}}
|
||||
If you want to be able to drain requests when the Pod is deleted, you do not
|
||||
necessarily need a readiness probe; on deletion, the Pod automatically puts itself
|
||||
into an unready state regardless of whether the readiness probe exists.
|
||||
The Pod remains in the unready state while it waits for the containers in the Pod
|
||||
to stop.
|
||||
necessarily need a readiness probe; when the Pod is deleted, the corresponding endpoint
|
||||
in the `EndppointSlice` will update its [conditions](/docs/concepts/services-networking/endpoint-slices/#conditions):
|
||||
the endpoint `ready` condition will be set to `false`, so load balancers
|
||||
will not use the Pod for regular traffic. See [Pod termination](#pod-termination)
|
||||
for more information about how the kubelet handles Pod deletion.
|
||||
{{< /note >}}
|
||||
|
||||
#### When should you use a startup probe?
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue