Merge pull request #23863 from tengqm/split-server-side-apply
Move Server Side Apply into a separate reference pagepull/23708/head
commit
9e862337b9
|
@ -510,7 +510,7 @@ Each feature gate is designed for enabling/disabling a specific feature:
|
|||
- `RuntimeClass`: Enable the [RuntimeClass](/docs/concepts/containers/runtime-class/) feature for selecting container runtime configurations.
|
||||
- `ScheduleDaemonSetPods`: Enable DaemonSet Pods to be scheduled by the default scheduler instead of the DaemonSet controller.
|
||||
- `SCTPSupport`: Enables the _SCTP_ `protocol` value in Pod, Service, Endpoints, EndpointSlice, and NetworkPolicy definitions.
|
||||
- `ServerSideApply`: Enables the [Sever Side Apply (SSA)](/docs/reference/using-api/api-concepts/#server-side-apply) path at the API Server.
|
||||
- `ServerSideApply`: Enables the [Sever Side Apply (SSA)](/docs/reference/using-api/server-side-apply/) path at the API Server.
|
||||
- `ServiceAccountIssuerDiscovery`: Enable OIDC discovery endpoints (issuer and JWKS URLs) for the service account issuer in the API server. See [Configure Service Accounts for Pods](/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/configure-service-account/#service-account-issuer-discovery) for more details.
|
||||
- `ServiceAppProtocol`: Enables the `AppProtocol` field on Services and Endpoints.
|
||||
- `ServiceLoadBalancerFinalizer`: Enable finalizer protection for Service load balancers.
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -431,444 +431,14 @@ Some values of an object are typically generated before the object is persisted.
|
|||
|
||||
## Server Side Apply
|
||||
|
||||
{{< feature-state for_k8s_version="v1.16" state="beta" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
Starting from Kubernetes v1.18, if you have Server Side Apply enabled then the control plane tracks managed fields for all newly created objects.
|
||||
|
||||
### Introduction
|
||||
|
||||
Server Side Apply helps users and controllers manage their resources via
|
||||
declarative configurations. It allows them to create and/or modify their
|
||||
objects declaratively, simply by sending their fully specified intent.
|
||||
|
||||
A fully specified intent is a partial object that only includes the fields and
|
||||
values for which the user has an opinion. That intent either creates a new
|
||||
object or is [combined](#merge-strategy), by the server, with the existing object.
|
||||
|
||||
The system supports multiple appliers collaborating on a single object.
|
||||
|
||||
Changes to an object's fields are tracked through a "[field management](#field-management)"
|
||||
mechanism. When a field's value changes, ownership moves from its current
|
||||
manager to the manager making the change. When trying to apply an object, fields
|
||||
that have a different value and are owned by another manager will result in a
|
||||
[conflict](#conflicts). This is done in order to signal that the operation might undo another
|
||||
collaborator's changes. Conflicts can be forced, in which case the value will be
|
||||
overridden, and the ownership will be transferred.
|
||||
|
||||
If you remove a field from a configuration and apply the configuration, server side apply checks
|
||||
if there are any other field managers that also own the field. If the field is
|
||||
not owned by any other field managers, it is either deleted from the live
|
||||
object or reset to its default value, if it has one. The same rule applies to associative list or
|
||||
map items.
|
||||
|
||||
Server side apply is meant both as a replacement for the original `kubectl
|
||||
apply` and as a simpler mechanism for controllers to enact their changes.
|
||||
|
||||
### Field Management
|
||||
|
||||
Compared to the `last-applied` annotation managed by `kubectl`, Server Side
|
||||
Apply uses a more declarative approach, which tracks a user's field management,
|
||||
rather than a user's last applied state. This means that as a side effect of
|
||||
using Server Side Apply, information about which field manager manages each
|
||||
field in an object also becomes available.
|
||||
|
||||
For a user to manage a field, in the Server Side Apply sense, means that the
|
||||
user relies on and expects the value of the field not to change. The user who
|
||||
last made an assertion about the value of a field will be recorded as the
|
||||
current field manager. This can be done either by changing the value with
|
||||
`POST`, `PUT`, or non-apply `PATCH`, or by including the field in a config sent
|
||||
to the Server Side Apply endpoint. When using Server-Side Apply, trying to
|
||||
change a field which is managed by someone else will result in a rejected
|
||||
request (if not forced, see [Conflicts](#conflicts)).
|
||||
|
||||
When two or more appliers set a field to the same value, they share ownership of
|
||||
that field. Any subsequent attempt to change the value of the shared field, by any of
|
||||
the appliers, results in a conflict. Shared field owners may give up ownership
|
||||
of a field by removing it from their configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
Field management is stored in a`managedFields` field that is part of an object's
|
||||
[`metadata`](/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/{{< latest-version >}}/#objectmeta-v1-meta).
|
||||
|
||||
A simple example of an object created by Server Side Apply could look like this:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
kind: ConfigMap
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
name: test-cm
|
||||
namespace: default
|
||||
labels:
|
||||
test-label: test
|
||||
managedFields:
|
||||
- manager: kubectl
|
||||
operation: Apply
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
time: "2010-10-10T0:00:00Z"
|
||||
fieldsType: FieldsV1
|
||||
fieldsV1:
|
||||
f:metadata:
|
||||
f:labels:
|
||||
f:test-label: {}
|
||||
f:data:
|
||||
f:key: {}
|
||||
data:
|
||||
key: some value
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The above object contains a single manager in `metadata.managedFields`. The
|
||||
manager consists of basic information about the managing entity itself, like
|
||||
operation type, API version, and the fields managed by it.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< note >}}
|
||||
This field is managed by the API server and should not be changed by
|
||||
the user.
|
||||
{{< /note >}}
|
||||
|
||||
Nevertheless it is possible to change `metadata.managedFields` through an
|
||||
`Update` operation. Doing so is highly discouraged, but might be a reasonable
|
||||
option to try if, for example, the `managedFields` get into an inconsistent
|
||||
state (which clearly should not happen).
|
||||
|
||||
The format of the `managedFields` is described in the [API](/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/{{< param "version" >}}/#fieldsv1-v1-meta).
|
||||
|
||||
### Conflicts
|
||||
|
||||
A conflict is a special status error that occurs when an `Apply` operation tries
|
||||
to change a field, which another user also claims to manage. This prevents an
|
||||
applier from unintentionally overwriting the value set by another user. When
|
||||
this occurs, the applier has 3 options to resolve the conflicts:
|
||||
|
||||
* **Overwrite value, become sole manager:** If overwriting the value was
|
||||
intentional (or if the applier is an automated process like a controller) the
|
||||
applier should set the `force` query parameter to true and make the request
|
||||
again. This forces the operation to succeed, changes the value of the field,
|
||||
and removes the field from all other managers' entries in managedFields.
|
||||
* **Don't overwrite value, give up management claim:** If the applier doesn't
|
||||
care about the value of the field anymore, they can remove it from their
|
||||
config and make the request again. This leaves the value unchanged, and causes
|
||||
the field to be removed from the applier's entry in managedFields.
|
||||
* **Don't overwrite value, become shared manager:** If the applier still cares
|
||||
about the value of the field, but doesn't want to overwrite it, they can
|
||||
change the value of the field in their config to match the value of the object
|
||||
on the server, and make the request again. This leaves the value unchanged,
|
||||
and causes the field's management to be shared by the applier and all other
|
||||
field managers that already claimed to manage it.
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
### Managers
|
||||
|
||||
Managers identify distinct workflows that are modifying the object (especially
|
||||
useful on conflicts!), and can be specified through the `fieldManager` query
|
||||
parameter as part of a modifying request. It is required for the apply endpoint,
|
||||
though kubectl will default it to `kubectl`. For other updates, its default is
|
||||
computed from the user-agent.
|
||||
|
||||
### Apply and Update
|
||||
|
||||
The two operation types considered by this feature are `Apply` (`PATCH` with
|
||||
content type `application/apply-patch+yaml`) and `Update` (all other operations
|
||||
which modify the object). Both operations update the `managedFields`, but behave
|
||||
a little differently.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< note >}}
|
||||
Whether you are submitting JSON data or YAML data, use `application/apply-patch+yaml` as the
|
||||
`Content-Type` header value.
|
||||
|
||||
All JSON documents are valid YAML.
|
||||
{{< /note >}}
|
||||
|
||||
For instance, only the apply operation fails on conflicts while update does
|
||||
not. Also, apply operations are required to identify themselves by providing a
|
||||
`fieldManager` query parameter, while the query parameter is optional for update
|
||||
operations. Finally, when using the apply operation you cannot have `managedFields` in the object that is being applied.
|
||||
|
||||
An example object with multiple managers could look like this:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
kind: ConfigMap
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
name: test-cm
|
||||
namespace: default
|
||||
labels:
|
||||
test-label: test
|
||||
managedFields:
|
||||
- manager: kubectl
|
||||
operation: Apply
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
fields:
|
||||
f:metadata:
|
||||
f:labels:
|
||||
f:test-label: {}
|
||||
- manager: kube-controller-manager
|
||||
operation: Update
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
time: '2019-03-30T16:00:00.000Z'
|
||||
fields:
|
||||
f:data:
|
||||
f:key: {}
|
||||
data:
|
||||
key: new value
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
In this example, a second operation was run as an `Update` by the manager called
|
||||
`kube-controller-manager`. The update changed a value in the data field which
|
||||
caused the field's management to change to the `kube-controller-manager`.
|
||||
|
||||
If this update would have been an `Apply` operation, the operation
|
||||
would have failed due to conflicting ownership.
|
||||
|
||||
### Merge strategy
|
||||
|
||||
The merging strategy, implemented with Server Side Apply, provides a generally
|
||||
more stable object lifecycle. Server Side Apply tries to merge fields based on
|
||||
the fact who manages them instead of overruling just based on values. This way
|
||||
it is intended to make it easier and more stable for multiple actors updating
|
||||
the same object by causing less unexpected interference.
|
||||
|
||||
When a user sends a "fully-specified intent" object to the Server Side Apply
|
||||
endpoint, the server merges it with the live object favoring the value in the
|
||||
applied config if it is specified in both places. If the set of items present in
|
||||
the applied config is not a superset of the items applied by the same user last
|
||||
time, each missing item not managed by any other appliers is removed. For
|
||||
more information about how an object's schema is used to make decisions when
|
||||
merging, see
|
||||
[sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff](https://sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff).
|
||||
|
||||
A number of markers were added in Kubernetes 1.16 and 1.17, to allow API
|
||||
developers to describe the merge strategy supported by lists, maps, and
|
||||
structs. These markers can be applied to objects of the respective type,
|
||||
in Go files or in the
|
||||
[OpenAPI schema definition of the CRD](/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/{{< param "version" >}}#jsonschemaprops-v1-apiextensions-k8s-io):
|
||||
|
||||
| Golang marker | OpenAPI extension | Accepted values | Description | Introduced in |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| `//+listType` | `x-kubernetes-list-type` | `atomic`/`set`/`map` | Applicable to lists. `atomic` and `set` apply to lists with scalar elements only. `map` applies to lists of nested types only. If configured as `atomic`, the entire list is replaced during merge; a single manager manages the list as a whole at any one time. If `granular`, different managers can manage entries separately. | 1.16 |
|
||||
| `//+listMapKey` | `x-kubernetes-list-map-keys` | Slice of map keys that uniquely identify entries for example `["port", "protocol"]` | Only applicable when `+listType=map`. A slice of strings whose values in combination must uniquely identify list entries. While there can be multiple keys, `listMapKey` is singular because keys need to be specified individually in the Go type. | 1.16 |
|
||||
| `//+mapType` | `x-kubernetes-map-type` | `atomic`/`granular` | Applicable to maps. `atomic` means that the map can only be entirely replaced by a single manager. `granular` means that the map supports separate managers updating individual fields. | 1.17 |
|
||||
| `//+structType` | `x-kubernetes-map-type` | `atomic`/`granular` | Applicable to structs; otherwise same usage and OpenAPI annotation as `//+mapType`.| 1.17 |
|
||||
|
||||
### Custom Resources
|
||||
|
||||
By default, Server Side Apply treats custom resources as unstructured data. All
|
||||
keys are treated the same as struct fields, and all lists are considered atomic.
|
||||
|
||||
If the Custom Resource Definition defines a
|
||||
[schema](/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/{{< param "version" >}}#jsonschemaprops-v1-apiextensions-k8s-io)
|
||||
that contains annotations as defined in the previous "Merge Strategy"
|
||||
section, these annotations will be used when merging objects of this
|
||||
type.
|
||||
|
||||
### Using Server-Side Apply in a controller
|
||||
|
||||
As a developer of a controller, you can use server-side apply as a way to
|
||||
simplify the update logic of your controller. The main differences with a
|
||||
read-modify-write and/or patch are the following:
|
||||
|
||||
* the applied object must contain all the fields that the controller cares about.
|
||||
* there are no way to remove fields that haven't been applied by the controller
|
||||
before (controller can still send a PATCH/UPDATE for these use-cases).
|
||||
* the object doesn't have to be read beforehand, `resourceVersion` doesn't have
|
||||
to be specified.
|
||||
|
||||
It is strongly recommended for controllers to always "force" conflicts, since they
|
||||
might not be able to resolve or act on these conflicts.
|
||||
|
||||
### Transferring Ownership
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to the concurrency controls provided by [conflict resolution](#conflicts),
|
||||
Server Side Apply provides ways to perform coordinated
|
||||
field ownership transfers from users to controllers.
|
||||
|
||||
This is best explained by example. Let's look at how to safely transfer
|
||||
ownership of the `replicas` field from a user to a controller while enabling
|
||||
automatic horizontal scaling for a Deployment, using the HorizontalPodAutoscaler
|
||||
resource and its accompanying controller.
|
||||
|
||||
Say a user has defined deployment with `replicas` set to the desired value:
|
||||
|
||||
{{< codenew file="application/ssa/nginx-deployment.yaml" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
And the user has created the deployment using server side apply like so:
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply -f https://k8s.io/examples/application/ssa/nginx-deployment.yaml --server-side
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then later, HPA is enabled for the deployment, e.g.:
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl autoscale deployment nginx-deployment --cpu-percent=50 --min=1 --max=10
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now, the user would like to remove `replicas` from their configuration, so they
|
||||
don't accidentally fight with the HPA controller. However, there is a race: it
|
||||
might take some time before HPA feels the need to adjust `replicas`, and if
|
||||
the user removes `replicas` before the HPA writes to the field and becomes
|
||||
its owner, then apiserver will set `replicas` to 1, its default value. This
|
||||
is not what the user wants to happen, even temporarily.
|
||||
|
||||
There are two solutions:
|
||||
|
||||
- (easy) Leave `replicas` in the configuration; when HPA eventually writes to that
|
||||
field, the system gives the user a conflict over it. At that point, it is safe
|
||||
to remove from the configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
- (more advanced) If, however, the user doesn't want to wait, for example
|
||||
because they want to keep the cluster legible to coworkers, then they can take
|
||||
the following steps to make it safe to remove `replicas` from their
|
||||
configuration:
|
||||
|
||||
First, the user defines a new configuration containing only the `replicas` field:
|
||||
|
||||
{{< codenew file="application/ssa/nginx-deployment-replicas-only.yaml" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
The user applies that configuration using the field manager name `handover-to-hpa`:
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply -f https://k8s.io/examples/application/ssa/nginx-deployment-replicas-only.yaml --server-side --field-manager=handover-to-hpa --validate=false
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If the apply results in a conflict with the HPA controller, then do nothing. The
|
||||
conflict just indicates the controller has claimed the field earlier in the
|
||||
process than it sometimes does.
|
||||
|
||||
At this point the user may remove the `replicas` field from their configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< codenew file="application/ssa/nginx-deployment-no-replicas.yaml" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
Note that whenever the HPA controller sets the `replicas` field to a new value,
|
||||
the temporary field manager will no longer own any fields and will be
|
||||
automatically deleted. No clean up is required.
|
||||
|
||||
### Transferring Ownership Between Users
|
||||
|
||||
Users can transfer ownership of a field between each other by setting the field
|
||||
to the same value in both of their applied configs, causing them to share
|
||||
ownership of the field. Once the users share ownership of the field, one of them
|
||||
can remove the field from their applied configuration to give up ownership and
|
||||
complete the transfer to the other user.
|
||||
|
||||
### Comparison with Client Side Apply
|
||||
|
||||
A consequence of the conflict detection and resolution implemented by Server
|
||||
Side Apply is that an applier always has up to date field values in their local
|
||||
state. If they don't, they get a conflict the next time they apply. Any of the
|
||||
three options to resolve conflicts results in the applied configuration being an
|
||||
up to date subset of the object on the server's fields.
|
||||
|
||||
This is different from Client Side Apply, where outdated values which have been
|
||||
overwritten by other users are left in an applier's local config. These values
|
||||
only become accurate when the user updates that specific field, if ever, and an
|
||||
applier has no way of knowing whether their next apply will overwrite other
|
||||
users' changes.
|
||||
|
||||
Another difference is that an applier using Client Side Apply is unable to
|
||||
change the API version they are using, but Server Side Apply supports this use
|
||||
case.
|
||||
|
||||
### Upgrading from client-side apply to server-side apply
|
||||
|
||||
Client-side apply users who manage a resource with `kubectl apply` can start
|
||||
using server-side apply with the following flag.
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply --server-side [--dry-run=server]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
By default, field management of the object transfers from client-side apply
|
||||
to kubectl server-side apply without encountering conflicts.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< caution >}}
|
||||
Keep the `last-applied-configuration` annotation up to date.
|
||||
The annotation infers client-side apply's managed fields.
|
||||
Any fields not managed by client-side apply raise conflicts.
|
||||
|
||||
For example, if you used `kubectl scale` to update the replicas field after client-side apply,
|
||||
then this field is not owned by client-side apply and creates conflicts on `kubectl apply --server-side`.
|
||||
{{< /caution >}}
|
||||
|
||||
This behavior applies to server-side apply with the `kubectl` field manager. As
|
||||
an exception, you can opt-out of this behavior by specifying a different,
|
||||
non-default field manager, as seen in the following example. The default field manager for kubectl
|
||||
server-side apply is `kubectl`.
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply --server-side --field-manager=my-manager [--dry-run=server]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Downgrading from server-side apply to client-side apply
|
||||
|
||||
If you manage a resource with `kubectl apply --server-side`,
|
||||
you can downgrade to client-side apply directly with `kubectl apply`.
|
||||
|
||||
Downgrading works because kubectl server-side apply keeps the
|
||||
`last-applied-configuration` annotation up-to-date if you use
|
||||
`kubectl apply`.
|
||||
|
||||
This behavior applies to server-side apply with the `kubectl` field manager. As
|
||||
an exception, you can opt-out of this behavior by specifying a different,
|
||||
non-default field manager, as seen in the following example. The default field manager for kubectl
|
||||
server-side apply is `kubectl`.
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply --server-side --field-manager=my-manager [--dry-run=server]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### API Endpoint
|
||||
|
||||
With the Server Side Apply feature enabled, the `PATCH` endpoint accepts the
|
||||
additional `application/apply-patch+yaml` content type. Users of Server Side
|
||||
Apply can send partially specified objects as YAML to this endpoint.
|
||||
When applying a configuration, one should always include all the fields
|
||||
that they have an opinion about.
|
||||
|
||||
### Clearing ManagedFields
|
||||
|
||||
It is possible to strip all managedFields from an object by overwriting them
|
||||
using `MergePatch`, `StrategicMergePatch`, `JSONPatch` or `Update`, so every
|
||||
non-apply operation. This can be done by overwriting the managedFields field
|
||||
with an empty entry. Two examples are:
|
||||
|
||||
```console
|
||||
PATCH /api/v1/namespaces/default/configmaps/example-cm
|
||||
Content-Type: application/merge-patch+json
|
||||
Accept: application/json
|
||||
Data: {"metadata":{"managedFields": [{}]}}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
```console
|
||||
PATCH /api/v1/namespaces/default/configmaps/example-cm
|
||||
Content-Type: application/json-patch+json
|
||||
Accept: application/json
|
||||
Data: [{"op": "replace", "path": "/metadata/managedFields", "value": [{}]}]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This will overwrite the managedFields with a list containing a single empty
|
||||
entry that then results in the managedFields being stripped entirely from the
|
||||
object. Note that just setting the managedFields to an empty list will not reset
|
||||
the field. This is on purpose, so managedFields never get stripped by clients
|
||||
not aware of the field.
|
||||
|
||||
In cases where the reset operation is combined with changes to other fields than
|
||||
the managedFields, this will result in the managedFields being reset first and
|
||||
the other changes being processed afterwards. As a result the applier takes
|
||||
ownership of any fields updated in the same request.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< caution >}}
|
||||
Server Side Apply does not correctly track ownership on
|
||||
sub-resources that don't receive the resource object type. If you are
|
||||
using Server Side Apply with such a sub-resource, the changed fields
|
||||
won't be tracked.
|
||||
{{< /caution >}}
|
||||
|
||||
### Disabling the feature
|
||||
|
||||
Server Side Apply is a beta feature, so it is enabled by default. To turn this
|
||||
[feature gate](/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates) off,
|
||||
you need to include the `--feature-gates ServerSideApply=false` flag when
|
||||
starting `kube-apiserver`. If you have multiple `kube-apiserver` replicas, all
|
||||
should have the same flag setting.
|
||||
Starting from Kubernetes v1.18, you can enable the
|
||||
[Server Side Apply](/docs/reference/using-api/server-side-apply/)
|
||||
feature so that the control plane tracks managed fields for all newly created objects.
|
||||
Server Side Apply provides a clear pattern for managing field conflicts,
|
||||
offers server-side `Apply` and `Update` operations, and replaces the
|
||||
client-side functionality of `kubectl apply`. For more details about this
|
||||
feature, see the section on
|
||||
[Server Side Apply](/docs/reference/using-api/server-side-apply/).
|
||||
|
||||
## Resource Versions
|
||||
|
||||
|
|
|
@ -0,0 +1,462 @@
|
|||
---
|
||||
title: Server-Side Apply
|
||||
reviewers:
|
||||
- smarterclayton
|
||||
- apelisse
|
||||
- lavalamp
|
||||
- liggitt
|
||||
content_type: concept
|
||||
weight: 25
|
||||
min-kubernetes-server-version: 1.16
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
<!-- overview -->
|
||||
|
||||
{{< feature-state for_k8s_version="v1.16" state="beta" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
## Introduction
|
||||
|
||||
Server Side Apply helps users and controllers manage their resources via
|
||||
declarative configurations. It allows them to create and/or modify their
|
||||
[objects](/docs/concepts/overview/working-with-objects/kubernetes-objects/)
|
||||
declaratively, simply by sending their fully specified intent.
|
||||
|
||||
A fully specified intent is a partial object that only includes the fields and
|
||||
values for which the user has an opinion. That intent either creates a new
|
||||
object or is [combined](#merge-strategy), by the server, with the existing object.
|
||||
|
||||
The system supports multiple appliers collaborating on a single object.
|
||||
|
||||
Changes to an object's fields are tracked through a "[field management](#field-management)"
|
||||
mechanism. When a field's value changes, ownership moves from its current
|
||||
manager to the manager making the change. When trying to apply an object,
|
||||
fields that have a different value and are owned by another manager will
|
||||
result in a [conflict](#conflicts). This is done in order to signal that the
|
||||
operation might undo another collaborator's changes. Conflicts can be forced,
|
||||
in which case the value will be overridden, and the ownership will be
|
||||
transferred.
|
||||
|
||||
If you remove a field from a configuration and apply the configuration, server
|
||||
side apply checks if there are any other field managers that also own the
|
||||
field. If the field is not owned by any other field managers, it is either
|
||||
deleted from the live object or reset to its default value, if it has one. The
|
||||
same rule applies to associative list or map items.
|
||||
|
||||
Server side apply is meant both as a replacement for the original `kubectl
|
||||
apply` and as a simpler mechanism for controllers to enact their changes.
|
||||
|
||||
If you have Server Side Apply enabled, the control plane tracks managed fields
|
||||
for all newlly created objects.
|
||||
|
||||
## Field Management
|
||||
|
||||
Compared to the `last-applied` annotation managed by `kubectl`, Server Side
|
||||
Apply uses a more declarative approach, which tracks a user's field management,
|
||||
rather than a user's last applied state. This means that as a side effect of
|
||||
using Server Side Apply, information about which field manager manages each
|
||||
field in an object also becomes available.
|
||||
|
||||
For a user to manage a field, in the Server Side Apply sense, means that the
|
||||
user relies on and expects the value of the field not to change. The user who
|
||||
last made an assertion about the value of a field will be recorded as the
|
||||
current field manager. This can be done either by changing the value with
|
||||
`POST`, `PUT`, or non-apply `PATCH`, or by including the field in a config sent
|
||||
to the Server Side Apply endpoint. When using Server-Side Apply, trying to
|
||||
change a field which is managed by someone else will result in a rejected
|
||||
request (if not forced, see [Conflicts](#conflicts)).
|
||||
|
||||
When two or more appliers set a field to the same value, they share ownership of
|
||||
that field. Any subsequent attempt to change the value of the shared field, by any of
|
||||
the appliers, results in a conflict. Shared field owners may give up ownership
|
||||
of a field by removing it from their configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
Field management is stored in a`managedFields` field that is part of an object's
|
||||
[`metadata`](/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/{{< latest-version >}}/#objectmeta-v1-meta).
|
||||
|
||||
A simple example of an object created by Server Side Apply could look like this:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
kind: ConfigMap
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
name: test-cm
|
||||
namespace: default
|
||||
labels:
|
||||
test-label: test
|
||||
managedFields:
|
||||
- manager: kubectl
|
||||
operation: Apply
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
time: "2010-10-10T0:00:00Z"
|
||||
fieldsType: FieldsV1
|
||||
fieldsV1:
|
||||
f:metadata:
|
||||
f:labels:
|
||||
f:test-label: {}
|
||||
f:data:
|
||||
f:key: {}
|
||||
data:
|
||||
key: some value
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
The above object contains a single manager in `metadata.managedFields`. The
|
||||
manager consists of basic information about the managing entity itself, like
|
||||
operation type, API version, and the fields managed by it.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< note >}}
|
||||
This field is managed by the API server and should not be changed by
|
||||
the user.
|
||||
{{< /note >}}
|
||||
|
||||
Nevertheless it is possible to change `metadata.managedFields` through an
|
||||
`Update` operation. Doing so is highly discouraged, but might be a reasonable
|
||||
option to try if, for example, the `managedFields` get into an inconsistent
|
||||
state (which clearly should not happen).
|
||||
|
||||
The format of the `managedFields` is described in the
|
||||
[API](/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/{{< param "version" >}}/#fieldsv1-v1-meta).
|
||||
|
||||
## Conflicts
|
||||
|
||||
A conflict is a special status error that occurs when an `Apply` operation tries
|
||||
to change a field, which another user also claims to manage. This prevents an
|
||||
applier from unintentionally overwriting the value set by another user. When
|
||||
this occurs, the applier has 3 options to resolve the conflicts:
|
||||
|
||||
* **Overwrite value, become sole manager:** If overwriting the value was
|
||||
intentional (or if the applier is an automated process like a controller) the
|
||||
applier should set the `force` query parameter to true and make the request
|
||||
again. This forces the operation to succeed, changes the value of the field,
|
||||
and removes the field from all other managers' entries in managedFields.
|
||||
|
||||
* **Don't overwrite value, give up management claim:** If the applier doesn't
|
||||
care about the value of the field anymore, they can remove it from their
|
||||
config and make the request again. This leaves the value unchanged, and causes
|
||||
the field to be removed from the applier's entry in managedFields.
|
||||
|
||||
* **Don't overwrite value, become shared manager:** If the applier still cares
|
||||
about the value of the field, but doesn't want to overwrite it, they can
|
||||
change the value of the field in their config to match the value of the object
|
||||
on the server, and make the request again. This leaves the value unchanged,
|
||||
and causes the field's management to be shared by the applier and all other
|
||||
field managers that already claimed to manage it.
|
||||
|
||||
## Managers
|
||||
|
||||
Managers identify distinct workflows that are modifying the object (especially
|
||||
useful on conflicts!), and can be specified through the `fieldManager` query
|
||||
parameter as part of a modifying request. It is required for the apply endpoint,
|
||||
though kubectl will default it to `kubectl`. For other updates, its default is
|
||||
computed from the user-agent.
|
||||
|
||||
## Apply and Update
|
||||
|
||||
The two operation types considered by this feature are `Apply` (`PATCH` with
|
||||
content type `application/apply-patch+yaml`) and `Update` (all other operations
|
||||
which modify the object). Both operations update the `managedFields`, but behave
|
||||
a little differently.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< note >}}
|
||||
Whether you are submitting JSON data or YAML data, use
|
||||
`application/apply-patch+yaml` as the `Content-Type` header value.
|
||||
|
||||
All JSON documents are valid YAML.
|
||||
{{< /note >}}
|
||||
|
||||
For instance, only the apply operation fails on conflicts while update does
|
||||
not. Also, apply operations are required to identify themselves by providing a
|
||||
`fieldManager` query parameter, while the query parameter is optional for update
|
||||
operations. Finally, when using the apply operation you cannot have
|
||||
`managedFields` in the object that is being applied.
|
||||
|
||||
An example object with multiple managers could look like this:
|
||||
|
||||
```yaml
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
kind: ConfigMap
|
||||
metadata:
|
||||
name: test-cm
|
||||
namespace: default
|
||||
labels:
|
||||
test-label: test
|
||||
managedFields:
|
||||
- manager: kubectl
|
||||
operation: Apply
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
fields:
|
||||
f:metadata:
|
||||
f:labels:
|
||||
f:test-label: {}
|
||||
- manager: kube-controller-manager
|
||||
operation: Update
|
||||
apiVersion: v1
|
||||
time: '2019-03-30T16:00:00.000Z'
|
||||
fields:
|
||||
f:data:
|
||||
f:key: {}
|
||||
data:
|
||||
key: new value
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
In this example, a second operation was run as an `Update` by the manager called
|
||||
`kube-controller-manager`. The update changed a value in the data field which
|
||||
caused the field's management to change to the `kube-controller-manager`.
|
||||
|
||||
If this update would have been an `Apply` operation, the operation
|
||||
would have failed due to conflicting ownership.
|
||||
|
||||
## Merge strategy
|
||||
|
||||
The merging strategy, implemented with Server Side Apply, provides a generally
|
||||
more stable object lifecycle. Server Side Apply tries to merge fields based on
|
||||
the fact who manages them instead of overruling just based on values. This way
|
||||
it is intended to make it easier and more stable for multiple actors updating
|
||||
the same object by causing less unexpected interference.
|
||||
|
||||
When a user sends a "fully-specified intent" object to the Server Side Apply
|
||||
endpoint, the server merges it with the live object favoring the value in the
|
||||
applied config if it is specified in both places. If the set of items present in
|
||||
the applied config is not a superset of the items applied by the same user last
|
||||
time, each missing item not managed by any other appliers is removed. For
|
||||
more information about how an object's schema is used to make decisions when
|
||||
merging, see
|
||||
[sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff](https://sigs.k8s.io/structured-merge-diff).
|
||||
|
||||
A number of markers were added in Kubernetes 1.16 and 1.17, to allow API
|
||||
developers to describe the merge strategy supported by lists, maps, and
|
||||
structs. These markers can be applied to objects of the respective type,
|
||||
in Go files or in the OpenAPI schema definition of the
|
||||
[CRD](/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/{{< param "version" >}}#jsonschemaprops-v1-apiextensions-k8s-io):
|
||||
|
||||
| Golang marker | OpenAPI extension | Accepted values | Description | Introduced in |
|
||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
||||
| `//+listType` | `x-kubernetes-list-type` | `atomic`/`set`/`map` | Applicable to lists. `atomic` and `set` apply to lists with scalar elements only. `map` applies to lists of nested types only. If configured as `atomic`, the entire list is replaced during merge; a single manager manages the list as a whole at any one time. If `granular`, different managers can manage entries separately. | 1.16 |
|
||||
| `//+listMapKey` | `x-kubernetes-list-map-keys` | Slice of map keys that uniquely identify entries for example `["port", "protocol"]` | Only applicable when `+listType=map`. A slice of strings whose values in combination must uniquely identify list entries. While there can be multiple keys, `listMapKey` is singular because keys need to be specified individually in the Go type. | 1.16 |
|
||||
| `//+mapType` | `x-kubernetes-map-type` | `atomic`/`granular` | Applicable to maps. `atomic` means that the map can only be entirely replaced by a single manager. `granular` means that the map supports separate managers updating individual fields. | 1.17 |
|
||||
| `//+structType` | `x-kubernetes-map-type` | `atomic`/`granular` | Applicable to structs; otherwise same usage and OpenAPI annotation as `//+mapType`.| 1.17 |
|
||||
|
||||
### Custom Resources
|
||||
|
||||
By default, Server Side Apply treats custom resources as unstructured data. All
|
||||
keys are treated the same as struct fields, and all lists are considered atomic.
|
||||
|
||||
If the Custom Resource Definition defines a
|
||||
[schema](/docs/reference/generated/kubernetes-api/{{< param "version" >}}#jsonschemaprops-v1-apiextensions-k8s-io)
|
||||
that contains annotations as defined in the previous "Merge Strategy"
|
||||
section, these annotations will be used when merging objects of this
|
||||
type.
|
||||
|
||||
### Using Server-Side Apply in a controller
|
||||
|
||||
As a developer of a controller, you can use server-side apply as a way to
|
||||
simplify the update logic of your controller. The main differences with a
|
||||
read-modify-write and/or patch are the following:
|
||||
|
||||
* the applied object must contain all the fields that the controller cares about.
|
||||
* there are no way to remove fields that haven't been applied by the controller
|
||||
before (controller can still send a PATCH/UPDATE for these use-cases).
|
||||
* the object doesn't have to be read beforehand, `resourceVersion` doesn't have
|
||||
to be specified.
|
||||
|
||||
It is strongly recommended for controllers to always "force" conflicts, since they
|
||||
might not be able to resolve or act on these conflicts.
|
||||
|
||||
### Transferring Ownership
|
||||
|
||||
In addition to the concurrency controls provided by [conflict resolution](#conflicts),
|
||||
Server Side Apply provides ways to perform coordinated
|
||||
field ownership transfers from users to controllers.
|
||||
|
||||
This is best explained by example. Let's look at how to safely transfer
|
||||
ownership of the `replicas` field from a user to a controller while enabling
|
||||
automatic horizontal scaling for a Deployment, using the HorizontalPodAutoscaler
|
||||
resource and its accompanying controller.
|
||||
|
||||
Say a user has defined deployment with `replicas` set to the desired value:
|
||||
|
||||
{{< codenew file="application/ssa/nginx-deployment.yaml" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
And the user has created the deployment using server side apply like so:
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply -f https://k8s.io/examples/application/ssa/nginx-deployment.yaml --server-side
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Then later, HPA is enabled for the deployment, e.g.:
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl autoscale deployment nginx-deployment --cpu-percent=50 --min=1 --max=10
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
Now, the user would like to remove `replicas` from their configuration, so they
|
||||
don't accidentally fight with the HPA controller. However, there is a race: it
|
||||
might take some time before HPA feels the need to adjust `replicas`, and if
|
||||
the user removes `replicas` before the HPA writes to the field and becomes
|
||||
its owner, then apiserver will set `replicas` to 1, its default value. This
|
||||
is not what the user wants to happen, even temporarily.
|
||||
|
||||
There are two solutions:
|
||||
|
||||
- (easy) Leave `replicas` in the configuration; when HPA eventually writes to that
|
||||
field, the system gives the user a conflict over it. At that point, it is safe
|
||||
to remove from the configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
- (more advanced) If, however, the user doesn't want to wait, for example
|
||||
because they want to keep the cluster legible to coworkers, then they can take
|
||||
the following steps to make it safe to remove `replicas` from their
|
||||
configuration:
|
||||
|
||||
First, the user defines a new configuration containing only the `replicas` field:
|
||||
|
||||
{{< codenew file="application/ssa/nginx-deployment-replicas-only.yaml" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
The user applies that configuration using the field manager name `handover-to-hpa`:
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply -f https://k8s.io/examples/application/ssa/nginx-deployment-replicas-only.yaml \
|
||||
--server-side --field-manager=handover-to-hpa \
|
||||
--validate=false
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
If the apply results in a conflict with the HPA controller, then do nothing. The
|
||||
conflict just indicates the controller has claimed the field earlier in the
|
||||
process than it sometimes does.
|
||||
|
||||
At this point the user may remove the `replicas` field from their configuration.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< codenew file="application/ssa/nginx-deployment-no-replicas.yaml" >}}
|
||||
|
||||
Note that whenever the HPA controller sets the `replicas` field to a new value,
|
||||
the temporary field manager will no longer own any fields and will be
|
||||
automatically deleted. No clean up is required.
|
||||
|
||||
## Transferring Ownership Between Users
|
||||
|
||||
Users can transfer ownership of a field between each other by setting the field
|
||||
to the same value in both of their applied configs, causing them to share
|
||||
ownership of the field. Once the users share ownership of the field, one of them
|
||||
can remove the field from their applied configuration to give up ownership and
|
||||
complete the transfer to the other user.
|
||||
|
||||
## Comparison with Client Side Apply
|
||||
|
||||
A consequence of the conflict detection and resolution implemented by Server
|
||||
Side Apply is that an applier always has up to date field values in their local
|
||||
state. If they don't, they get a conflict the next time they apply. Any of the
|
||||
three options to resolve conflicts results in the applied configuration being an
|
||||
up to date subset of the object on the server's fields.
|
||||
|
||||
This is different from Client Side Apply, where outdated values which have been
|
||||
overwritten by other users are left in an applier's local config. These values
|
||||
only become accurate when the user updates that specific field, if ever, and an
|
||||
applier has no way of knowing whether their next apply will overwrite other
|
||||
users' changes.
|
||||
|
||||
Another difference is that an applier using Client Side Apply is unable to
|
||||
change the API version they are using, but Server Side Apply supports this use
|
||||
case.
|
||||
|
||||
## Upgrading from client-side apply to server-side apply
|
||||
|
||||
Client-side apply users who manage a resource with `kubectl apply` can start
|
||||
using server-side apply with the following flag.
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply --server-side [--dry-run=server]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
By default, field management of the object transfers from client-side apply to
|
||||
kubectl server-side apply without encountering conflicts.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< caution >}}
|
||||
Keep the `last-applied-configuration` annotation up to date.
|
||||
The annotation infers client-side apply's managed fields.
|
||||
Any fields not managed by client-side apply raise conflicts.
|
||||
|
||||
For example, if you used `kubectl scale` to update the replicas field after
|
||||
client-side apply, then this field is not owned by client-side apply and
|
||||
creates conflicts on `kubectl apply --server-side`.
|
||||
{{< /caution >}}
|
||||
|
||||
This behavior applies to server-side apply with the `kubectl` field manager.
|
||||
As an exception, you can opt-out of this behavior by specifying a different,
|
||||
non-default field manager, as seen in the following example. The default field
|
||||
manager for kubectl server-side apply is `kubectl`.
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply --server-side --field-manager=my-manager [--dry-run=server]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Downgrading from server-side apply to client-side apply
|
||||
|
||||
If you manage a resource with `kubectl apply --server-side`,
|
||||
you can downgrade to client-side apply directly with `kubectl apply`.
|
||||
|
||||
Downgrading works because kubectl server-side apply keeps the
|
||||
`last-applied-configuration` annotation up-to-date if you use
|
||||
`kubectl apply`.
|
||||
|
||||
This behavior applies to server-side apply with the `kubectl` field manager.
|
||||
As an exception, you can opt-out of this behavior by specifying a different,
|
||||
non-default field manager, as seen in the following example. The default field
|
||||
manager for kubectl server-side apply is `kubectl`.
|
||||
|
||||
```shell
|
||||
kubectl apply --server-side --field-manager=my-manager [--dry-run=server]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## API Endpoint
|
||||
|
||||
With the Server Side Apply feature enabled, the `PATCH` endpoint accepts the
|
||||
additional `application/apply-patch+yaml` content type. Users of Server Side
|
||||
Apply can send partially specified objects as YAML to this endpoint. When
|
||||
applying a configuration, one should always include all the fields that they
|
||||
have an opinion about.
|
||||
|
||||
## Clearing ManagedFields
|
||||
|
||||
It is possible to strip all managedFields from an object by overwriting them
|
||||
using `MergePatch`, `StrategicMergePatch`, `JSONPatch` or `Update`, so every
|
||||
non-apply operation. This can be done by overwriting the managedFields field
|
||||
with an empty entry. Two examples are:
|
||||
|
||||
```console
|
||||
PATCH /api/v1/namespaces/default/configmaps/example-cm
|
||||
Content-Type: application/merge-patch+json
|
||||
Accept: application/json
|
||||
Data: {"metadata":{"managedFields": [{}]}}
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
```console
|
||||
PATCH /api/v1/namespaces/default/configmaps/example-cm
|
||||
Content-Type: application/json-patch+json
|
||||
Accept: application/json
|
||||
Data: [{"op": "replace", "path": "/metadata/managedFields", "value": [{}]}]
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
This will overwrite the managedFields with a list containing a single empty
|
||||
entry that then results in the managedFields being stripped entirely from the
|
||||
object. Note that just setting the managedFields to an empty list will not
|
||||
reset the field. This is on purpose, so managedFields never get stripped by
|
||||
clients not aware of the field.
|
||||
|
||||
In cases where the reset operation is combined with changes to other fields
|
||||
than the managedFields, this will result in the managedFields being reset
|
||||
first and the other changes being processed afterwards. As a result the
|
||||
applier takes ownership of any fields updated in the same request.
|
||||
|
||||
{{< caution >}}
|
||||
Server Side Apply does not correctly track ownership on
|
||||
sub-resources that don't receive the resource object type. If you are
|
||||
using Server Side Apply with such a sub-resource, the changed fields
|
||||
won't be tracked.
|
||||
{{< /caution >}}
|
||||
|
||||
## Disabling the feature
|
||||
|
||||
Server Side Apply is a beta feature, so it is enabled by default. To turn this
|
||||
[feature gate](/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates) off,
|
||||
you need to include the `--feature-gates ServerSideApply=false` flag when
|
||||
starting `kube-apiserver`. If you have multiple `kube-apiserver` replicas, all
|
||||
should have the same flag setting.
|
||||
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue