feat(admission-controller): separate CPU/Memory requests and limits for Auto-Instrumentation Init Containers#41048
Open
puretension wants to merge 4 commits intoDataDog:mainfrom
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
community
team/container-platform
…or auto-instrumentation init containers Add support for separate CPU/Memory requests and limits for auto-instrumentation init containers using new environment variables: - DD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_REQUESTS_CPU - DD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_REQUESTS_MEMORY - DD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_LIMITS_CPU - DD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_LIMITS_MEMORY This resolves OOMKilled issues while maintaining scheduling efficiency by allowing low requests for scheduling and higher limits for initialization spikes. Fixes DataDog#38831
puretension
force-pushed
the
feat/separate-init-container-requests-limits-38831
branch
from
30be358 to
b66f82c
Compare
rtrieu
approved these changes
Sep 18, 2025
hush-hush
requested changes
Oct 24, 2025
Replace BindEnv with BindEnvAndSetDefault for admission controller auto-instrumentation init container resource configurations to provide explicit types and default values as requested in code review. Signed-off-by: puretension <rlrlfhtm5@gmail.com>
hush-hush
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2025
puretension
changed the title
Author
|
Hi @hush-hush! Thank you for approving the PR 🙏 There's a conflict in |
zhuminyi
reviewed
Oct 28, 2025
|
|
||
| // If neither requests nor limits are configured, use auto-calculation | ||
| if _, hasReq := conf.requests[k]; !hasReq { | ||
| if _, hasLim := conf.limits[k]; !hasLim { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This only auto-calculates when BOTH requests AND limits are missing. What if user only sets one value? Can you clarify in the comment or doc for this case.
zhuminyi
reviewed
Oct 28, 2025
| // We don't support other resources | ||
| requirements.Limits[k] = maxPodLim | ||
| } | ||
| if maxPodReq, ok := podRequirements.Requests[k]; ok { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we move this part outsides of current !hasLim condition?
Address zhuminyi's review feedback: - Remove nested conditions that only auto-calculated when BOTH requests AND limits were missing - Move requests processing outside of !hasLim condition to handle them independently - Now each resource (requests/limits) is auto-calculated independently when not configured This allows users to set only requests OR only limits, with the other being auto-calculated. Signed-off-by: puretension <rlrlfhtm5@gmail.com>
Author
|
Thank you for the sharp feedback @zhuminyi.
This makes the behavior much clearer and more flexible for users who want to configure only one of the two values. |
zhuminyi
approved these changes
Oct 28, 2025
rahulkaukuntla
approved these changes
Nov 21, 2025
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
Adds support for separate CPU/Memory requests and limits for auto-instrumentation init containers by introducing 4 new environment variables:
DD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_REQUESTS_CPUDD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_REQUESTS_MEMORYDD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_LIMITS_CPUDD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_LIMITS_MEMORYThis allows independent configuration of requests (for scheduling) and limits (for initialization spikes), while maintaining backward compatibility with existing
DD_ADMISSION_CONTROLLER_AUTO_INSTRUMENTATION_INIT_RESOURCES_*variables.Motivation
Fixes #38831
The current implementation forces
requests = limitsfor auto-instrumentation init containers, leading to:Related issues:
Describe how you validated your changes
TestSeparateRequestsAndLimitsto verify configuration parsing and validation logicTestSeparateRequestsAndLimitsIntegrationto test actual pod injection scenarioslimits ≥ requestsvalidation with clear error messagesTest coverage includes:
Additional Notes