using discard_unpacked_layers with CRI to reduce the size on disk of the cached images #5077
Conversation
djsly
requested review from
juan-lee,
cameronmeissner,
UtheMan,
ganeshkumarashok,
anujmaheshwari1,
AlisonB319,
Devinwong,
lilypan26,
ShiqianTao,
AbelHu,
junjiezhang1997,
jason1028kr and
phealy
as code owners
|
|
||
| disable_containerd_discard_unpacked_layers() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
will this preserve our ability to do retagging for china cloud at runtime?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm reenabling it at the end. I will need to test. This is on my bucket list. to see what will happen. I guess we dont have an e2e for that right ?
djsly
force-pushed
the
djsly/reducevhdsize/remove-packed-image-layers
branch
from
8ebaf96
to
1fb6764
Compare
djsly
force-pushed
the
djsly/reducevhdsize/remove-packed-image-layers
branch
from
5c59c76
to
2938a6d
Compare
djsly
force-pushed
the
djsly/reducevhdsize/remove-packed-image-layers
branch
from
85351c4
to
684823e
Compare
| @@ -80,5 +80,5 @@ EVENT_JSON=$( jq -n \ | |||
| --arg EventTid "0" \ | |||
| '{Timestamp: $Timestamp, OperationId: $OperationId, Version: $Version, TaskName: $TaskName, EventLevel: $EventLevel, Message: $Message, EventPid: $EventPid, EventTid: $EventTid}' | |||
| ) | |||
|
|
|||
| mkdir -p ${EVENTS_LOGGING_DIR} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we shouldn't need to do this, WALinuxAgent will do this as a part of executing the extension
| @@ -5,7 +5,12 @@ retrycmd_get_tarball() { | |||
| tar_retries=$1; wait_sleep=$2; tarball=$3; url=$4 | |||
| echo "${tar_retries} retries" | |||
| for i in $(seq 1 $tar_retries); do | |||
| tar -tzf $tarball && break || \ | |||
| if [ -f $tarball ]; then | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this an unrelated change?
| @@ -69,5 +69,5 @@ func ListImages(sku, version string) (*List, error) { | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| func isID(imageName string) bool { | |||
| return strings.Contains(imageName, "sha256") | |||
| return (strings.Contains(imageName, "sha256") && !strings.HasPrefix(imageName, "sha256:")) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| return (strings.Contains(imageName, "sha256") && !strings.HasPrefix(imageName, "sha256:")) | |
| return strings.Contains(imageName, "sha256") && !strings.HasPrefix(imageName, "sha256:") |
|
There are merge conflicts because of the other CSE changes - we need to rebase again |
| tar -tzf $tarball | ||
| if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then | ||
| break | ||
| fi |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why is this change necessary?
| else | ||
| # this is only called during cse. VHDs should have crictl binaries pre-cached so no need to download. | ||
| # if the vhd does not have crictl pre-baked, return early | ||
| CRICTL_TGZ_TEMP="crictl-v${CRICTL_VERSION}-linux-${CPU_ARCH}.tar.gz" | ||
| CRICTL_TGZ_TEMP="crictl-v${crictlVersion}-linux-${CPU_ARCH}.tar.gz" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is crictlVersion being set properly? I don't see it being passed to installCrictl during CSE but maybe I'm missing that
What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
Reducing the Packed Image layers (content) under /var/lib/containerd folder, this data is not used normally for creating container, it's used for republishing. CRICTL allows for this storage to be dleeted post unpacking, using the CRI flag
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Requirements:
Special notes for your reviewer:
Release note: