You are viewing documentation for Kubernetes version: v1.26
Kubernetes v1.26 documentation is no longer actively maintained. The version you are currently viewing is a static snapshot. For up-to-date information, see the latest version.
API Priority and Fairness
Kubernetes v1.20 [beta]
Controlling the behavior of the Kubernetes API server in an overload situation
is a key task for cluster administrators. The kube-apiserver has some controls available
(i.e. the --max-requests-inflight
and --max-mutating-requests-inflight
command-line flags) to limit the amount of outstanding work that will be
accepted, preventing a flood of inbound requests from overloading and
potentially crashing the API server, but these flags are not enough to ensure
that the most important requests get through in a period of high traffic.
The API Priority and Fairness feature (APF) is an alternative that improves upon aforementioned max-inflight limitations. APF classifies and isolates requests in a more fine-grained way. It also introduces a limited amount of queuing, so that no requests are rejected in cases of very brief bursts. Requests are dispatched from queues using a fair queuing technique so that, for example, a poorly-behaved controller need not starve others (even at the same priority level).
This feature is designed to work well with standard controllers, which use informers and react to failures of API requests with exponential back-off, and other clients that also work this way.
--max-requests-inflight
flag without the API Priority and Fairness
feature enabled. API Priority and Fairness does apply to watch
requests. When API Priority and Fairness is disabled, watch requests
are not subject to the --max-requests-inflight
limit.Enabling/Disabling API Priority and Fairness
The API Priority and Fairness feature is controlled by a feature gate
and is enabled by default. See Feature
Gates
for a general explanation of feature gates and how to enable and
disable them. The name of the feature gate for APF is
"APIPriorityAndFairness". This feature also involves an API Group with: (a) a
v1alpha1
version and a v1beta1
version, disabled by default, and
(b) v1beta2
and v1beta3
versions, enabled by default. You can
disable the feature gate and API group beta versions by adding the
following command-line flags to your kube-apiserver
invocation:
kube-apiserver \
--feature-gates=APIPriorityAndFairness=false \
--runtime-config=flowcontrol.apiserver.k8s.io/v1beta2=false,flowcontrol.apiserver.k8s.io/v1beta3=false \
# …and other flags as usual
Alternatively, you can enable the v1alpha1 and v1beta1 versions of the API group
with --runtime-config=flowcontrol.apiserver.k8s.io/v1alpha1=true,flowcontrol.apiserver.k8s.io/v1beta1=true
.
The command-line flag --enable-priority-and-fairness=false
will disable the
API Priority and Fairness feature, even if other flags have enabled it.
Concepts
There are several distinct features involved in the API Priority and Fairness feature. Incoming requests are classified by attributes of the request using FlowSchemas, and assigned to priority levels. Priority levels add a degree of isolation by maintaining separate concurrency limits, so that requests assigned to different priority levels cannot starve each other. Within a priority level, a fair-queuing algorithm prevents requests from different flows from starving each other, and allows for requests to be queued to prevent bursty traffic from causing failed requests when the average load is acceptably low.
Priority Levels
Without APF enabled, overall concurrency in the API server is limited by the
kube-apiserver
flags --max-requests-inflight
and
--max-mutating-requests-inflight
. With APF enabled, the concurrency limits
defined by these flags are summed and then the sum is divided up among a
configurable set of priority levels. Each incoming request is assigned to a
single priority level, and each priority level will only dispatch as many
concurrent requests as its particular limit allows.
The default configuration, for example, includes separate priority levels for leader-election requests, requests from built-in controllers, and requests from Pods. This means that an ill-behaved Pod that floods the API server with requests cannot prevent leader election or actions by the built-in controllers from succeeding.
The concurrency limits of the priority levels are periodically adjusted, allowing under-utilized priority levels to temporarily lend concurrency to heavily-utilized levels. These limits are based on nominal limits and bounds on how much concurrency a priority level may lend and how much it may borrow, all derived from the configuration objects mentioned below.
Seats Occupied by a Request
The above description of concurrency management is the baseline story. In it, requests have different durations but are counted equally at any given moment when comparing against a priority level's concurrency limit. In the baseline story, each request occupies one unit of concurrency. The word "seat" is used to mean one unit of concurrency, inspired by the way each passenger on a train or aircraft takes up one of the fixed supply of seats.
But some requests take up more than one seat. Some of these are list requests that the server estimates will return a large number of objects. These have been found to put an exceptionally heavy burden on the server, among requests that take a similar amount of time to run. For this reason, the server estimates the number of objects that will be returned and considers the request to take a number of seats that is proportional to that estimated number.
Execution time tweaks for watch requests
API Priority and Fairness manages watch requests, but this involves a couple more excursions from the baseline behavior. The first concerns how long a watch request is considered to occupy its seat. Depending on request parameters, the response to a watch request may or may not begin with create notifications for all the relevant pre-existing objects. API Priority and Fairness considers a watch request to be done with its seat once that initial burst of notifications, if any, is over.
The normal notifications are sent in a concurrent burst to all relevant watch response streams whenever the server is notified of an object create/update/delete. To account for this work, API Priority and Fairness considers every write request to spend some additional time occupying seats after the actual writing is done. The server estimates the number of notifications to be sent and adjusts the write request's number of seats and seat occupancy time to include this extra work.
Queuing
Even within a priority level there may be a large number of distinct sources of traffic. In an overload situation, it is valuable to prevent one stream of requests from starving others (in particular, in the relatively common case of a single buggy client flooding the kube-apiserver with requests, that buggy client would ideally not have much measurable impact on other clients at all). This is handled by use of a fair-queuing algorithm to process requests that are assigned the same priority level. Each request is assigned to a flow, identified by the name of the matching FlowSchema plus a flow distinguisher — which is either the requesting user, the target resource's namespace, or nothing — and the system attempts to give approximately equal weight to requests in different flows of the same priority level. To enable distinct handling of distinct instances, controllers that have many instances should authenticate with distinct usernames
After classifying a request into a flow, the API Priority and Fairness feature then may assign the request to a queue. This assignment uses a technique known as shuffle sharding, which makes relatively efficient use of queues to insulate low-intensity flows from high-intensity flows.
The details of the queuing algorithm are tunable for each priority level, and allow administrators to trade off memory use, fairness (the property that independent flows will all make progress when total traffic exceeds capacity), tolerance for bursty traffic, and the added latency induced by queuing.
Exempt requests
Some requests are considered sufficiently important that they are not subject to any of the limitations imposed by this feature. These exemptions prevent an improperly-configured flow control configuration from totally disabling an API server.
Resources
The flow control API involves two kinds of resources.
PriorityLevelConfigurations
define the available priority levels, the share of the available concurrency
budget that each can handle, and allow for fine-tuning queuing behavior.
FlowSchemas
are used to classify individual inbound requests, matching each to a
single PriorityLevelConfiguration. There is also a v1alpha1
version
of the same API group, and it has the same Kinds with the same syntax and
semantics.
PriorityLevelConfiguration
A PriorityLevelConfiguration represents a single priority level. Each PriorityLevelConfiguration has an independent limit on the number of outstanding requests, and limitations on the number of queued requests.
The nominal oncurrency limit for a PriorityLevelConfiguration is not
specified in an absolute number of seats, but rather in "nominal
concurrency shares." The total concurrency limit for the API Server is
distributed among the existing PriorityLevelConfigurations in
proportion to these shares, to give each level its nominal limit in
terms of seats. This allows a cluster administrator to scale up or
down the total amount of traffic to a server by restarting
kube-apiserver
with a different value for --max-requests-inflight
(or --max-mutating-requests-inflight
), and all
PriorityLevelConfigurations will see their maximum allowed concurrency
go up (or down) by the same fraction.
v1beta3
the relevant
PriorityLevelConfiguration field is named "assured concurrency shares"
rather than "nominal concurrency shares". Also, in Kubernetes release
1.25 and earlier there were no periodic adjustments: the
nominal/assured limits were always applied without adjustment.The bounds on how much concurrency a priority level may lend and how much it may borrow are expressed in the PriorityLevelConfiguration as percentages of the level's nominal limit. These are resolved to absolute numbers of seats by multiplying with the nominal limit / 100.0 and rounding. The dynamically adjusted concurrency limit of a priority level is constrained to lie between (a) a lower bound of its nominal limit minus its lendable seats and (b) an upper bound of its nominal limit plus the seats it may borrow. At each adjustment the dynamic limits are derived by each priority level reclaiming any lent seats for which demand recently appeared and then jointly fairly responding to the recent seat demand on the priority levels, within the bounds just described.
--max-requests-inflight
and
--max-mutating-requests-inflight
. There is no longer any distinction made
between mutating and non-mutating requests; if you want to treat them
separately for a given resource, make separate FlowSchemas that match the
mutating and non-mutating verbs respectively.When the volume of inbound requests assigned to a single
PriorityLevelConfiguration is more than its permitted concurrency level, the
type
field of its specification determines what will happen to extra requests.
A type of Reject
means that excess traffic will immediately be rejected with
an HTTP 429 (Too Many Requests) error. A type of Queue
means that requests
above the threshold will be queued, with the shuffle sharding and fair queuing techniques used
to balance progress between request flows.
The queuing configuration allows tuning the fair queuing algorithm for a priority level. Details of the algorithm can be read in the enhancement proposal, but in short:
Increasing
queues
reduces the rate of collisions between different flows, at the cost of increased memory usage. A value of 1 here effectively disables the fair-queuing logic, but still allows requests to be queued.Increasing
queueLengthLimit
allows larger bursts of traffic to be sustained without dropping any requests, at the cost of increased latency and memory usage.Changing
handSize
allows you to adjust the probability of collisions between different flows and the overall concurrency available to a single flow in an overload situation.Note: A largerhandSize
makes it less likely for two individual flows to collide (and therefore for one to be able to starve the other), but more likely that a small number of flows can dominate the apiserver. A largerhandSize
also potentially increases the amount of latency that a single high-traffic flow can cause. The maximum number of queued requests possible from a single flow ishandSize * queueLengthLimit
.
Following is a table showing an interesting collection of shuffle sharding configurations, showing for each the probability that a given mouse (low-intensity flow) is squished by the elephants (high-intensity flows) for an illustrative collection of numbers of elephants. See https://play.golang.org/p/Gi0PLgVHiUg , which computes this table.
HandSize | Queues | 1 elephant | 4 elephants | 16 elephants |
---|---|---|---|---|
12 | 32 | 4.428838398950118e-09 | 0.11431348830099144 | 0.9935089607656024 |
10 | 32 | 1.550093439632541e-08 | 0.0626479840223545 | 0.9753101519027554 |
10 | 64 | 6.601827268370426e-12 | 0.00045571320990370776 | 0.49999929150089345 |
9 | 64 | 3.6310049976037345e-11 | 0.00045501212304112273 | 0.4282314876454858 |
8 | 64 | 2.25929199850899e-10 | 0.0004886697053040446 | 0.35935114681123076 |
8 | 128 | 6.994461389026097e-13 | 3.4055790161620863e-06 | 0.02746173137155063 |
7 | 128 | 1.0579122850901972e-11 | 6.960839379258192e-06 | 0.02406157386340147 |
7 | 256 | 7.597695465552631e-14 | 6.728547142019406e-08 | 0.0006709661542533682 |
6 | 256 | 2.7134626662687968e-12 | 2.9516464018476436e-07 | 0.0008895654642000348 |
6 | 512 | 4.116062922897309e-14 | 4.982983350480894e-09 | 2.26025764343413e-05 |
6 | 1024 | 6.337324016514285e-16 | 8.09060164312957e-11 | 4.517408062903668e-07 |
FlowSchema
A FlowSchema matches some inbound requests and assigns them to a
priority level. Every inbound request is tested against every
FlowSchema in turn, starting with those with numerically lowest ---
which we take to be the logically highest --- matchingPrecedence
and
working onward. The first match wins.
matchingPrecedence
. If multiple FlowSchemas with equal
matchingPrecedence
match the same request, the one with lexicographically
smaller name
will win, but it's better not to rely on this, and instead to
ensure that no two FlowSchemas have the same matchingPrecedence
.A FlowSchema matches a given request if at least one of its rules
matches. A rule matches if at least one of its subjects
and at least
one of its resourceRules
or nonResourceRules
(depending on whether the
incoming request is for a resource or non-resource URL) matches the request.
For the name
field in subjects, and the verbs
, apiGroups
, resources
,
namespaces
, and nonResourceURLs
fields of resource and non-resource rules,
the wildcard *
may be specified to match all values for the given field,
effectively removing it from consideration.
A FlowSchema's distinguisherMethod.type
determines how requests matching that
schema will be separated into flows. It may be
either ByUser
, in which case one requesting user will not be able to starve
other users of capacity, or ByNamespace
, in which case requests for resources
in one namespace will not be able to starve requests for resources in other
namespaces of capacity, or it may be blank (or distinguisherMethod
may be
omitted entirely), in which case all requests matched by this FlowSchema will be
considered part of a single flow. The correct choice for a given FlowSchema
depends on the resource and your particular environment.
Defaults
Each kube-apiserver maintains two sorts of APF configuration objects: mandatory and suggested.
Mandatory Configuration Objects
The four mandatory configuration objects reflect fixed built-in guardrail behavior. This is behavior that the servers have before those objects exist, and when those objects exist their specs reflect this behavior. The four mandatory objects are as follows.
The mandatory
exempt
priority level is used for requests that are not subject to flow control at all: they will always be dispatched immediately. The mandatoryexempt
FlowSchema classifies all requests from thesystem:masters
group into this priority level. You may define other FlowSchemas that direct other requests to this priority level, if appropriate.The mandatory
catch-all
priority level is used in combination with the mandatorycatch-all
FlowSchema to make sure that every request gets some kind of classification. Typically you should not rely on this catch-all configuration, and should create your own catch-all FlowSchema and PriorityLevelConfiguration (or use the suggestedglobal-default
priority level that is installed by default) as appropriate. Because it is not expected to be used normally, the mandatorycatch-all
priority level has a very small concurrency share and does not queue requests.
Suggested Configuration Objects
The suggested FlowSchemas and PriorityLevelConfigurations constitute a reasonable default configuration. You can modify these and/or create additional configuration objects if you want. If your cluster is likely to experience heavy load then you should consider what configuration will work best.
The suggested configuration groups requests into six priority levels:
The
node-high
priority level is for health updates from nodes.The
system
priority level is for non-health requests from thesystem:nodes
group, i.e. Kubelets, which must be able to contact the API server in order for workloads to be able to schedule on them.The
leader-election
priority level is for leader election requests from built-in controllers (in particular, requests forendpoints
,configmaps
, orleases
coming from thesystem:kube-controller-manager
orsystem:kube-scheduler
users and service accounts in thekube-system
namespace). These are important to isolate from other traffic because failures in leader election cause their controllers to fail and restart, which in turn causes more expensive traffic as the new controllers sync their informers.The
workload-high
priority level is for other requests from built-in controllers.The
workload-low
priority level is for requests from any other service account, which will typically include all requests from controllers running in Pods.The
global-default
priority level handles all other traffic, e.g. interactivekubectl
commands run by nonprivileged users.
The suggested FlowSchemas serve to steer requests into the above priority levels, and are not enumerated here.
Maintenance of the Mandatory and Suggested Configuration Objects
Each kube-apiserver
independently maintains the mandatory and
suggested configuration objects, using initial and periodic behavior.
Thus, in a situation with a mixture of servers of different versions
there may be thrashing as long as different servers have different
opinions of the proper content of these objects.
Each kube-apiserver
makes an initial maintenance pass over the
mandatory and suggested configuration objects, and after that does
periodic maintenance (once per minute) of those objects.
For the mandatory configuration objects, maintenance consists of ensuring that the object exists and, if it does, has the proper spec. The server refuses to allow a creation or update with a spec that is inconsistent with the server's guardrail behavior.
Maintenance of suggested configuration objects is designed to allow
their specs to be overridden. Deletion, on the other hand, is not
respected: maintenance will restore the object. If you do not want a
suggested configuration object then you need to keep it around but set
its spec to have minimal consequences. Maintenance of suggested
objects is also designed to support automatic migration when a new
version of the kube-apiserver
is rolled out, albeit potentially with
thrashing while there is a mixed population of servers.
Maintenance of a suggested configuration object consists of creating
it --- with the server's suggested spec --- if the object does not
exist. OTOH, if the object already exists, maintenance behavior
depends on whether the kube-apiservers
or the users control the
object. In the former case, the server ensures that the object's spec
is what the server suggests; in the latter case, the spec is left
alone.
The question of who controls the object is answered by first looking
for an annotation with key apf.kubernetes.io/autoupdate-spec
. If
there is such an annotation and its value is true
then the
kube-apiservers control the object. If there is such an annotation
and its value is false
then the users control the object. If
neither of those condtions holds then the metadata.generation
of the
object is consulted. If that is 1 then the kube-apiservers control
the object. Otherwise the users control the object. These rules were
introduced in release 1.22 and their consideration of
metadata.generation
is for the sake of migration from the simpler
earlier behavior. Users who wish to control a suggested configuration
object should set its apf.kubernetes.io/autoupdate-spec
annotation
to false
.
Maintenance of a mandatory or suggested configuration object also
includes ensuring that it has an apf.kubernetes.io/autoupdate-spec
annotation that accurately reflects whether the kube-apiservers
control the object.
Maintenance also includes deleting objects that are neither mandatory
nor suggested but are annotated
apf.kubernetes.io/autoupdate-spec=true
.
Health check concurrency exemption
The suggested configuration gives no special treatment to the health
check requests on kube-apiservers from their local kubelets --- which
tend to use the secured port but supply no credentials. With the
suggested config, these requests get assigned to the global-default
FlowSchema and the corresponding global-default
priority level,
where other traffic can crowd them out.
If you add the following additional FlowSchema, this exempts those requests from rate limiting.
apiVersion: flowcontrol.apiserver.k8s.io/v1beta3
kind: FlowSchema
metadata:
name: health-for-strangers
spec:
matchingPrecedence: 1000
priorityLevelConfiguration:
name: exempt
rules:
- nonResourceRules:
- nonResourceURLs:
- "/healthz"
- "/livez"
- "/readyz"
verbs:
- "*"
subjects:
- kind: Group
group:
name: "system:unauthenticated"
Diagnostics
Every HTTP response from an API server with the priority and fairness feature
enabled has two extra headers: X-Kubernetes-PF-FlowSchema-UID
and
X-Kubernetes-PF-PriorityLevel-UID
, noting the flow schema that matched the request
and the priority level to which it was assigned, respectively. The API objects'
names are not included in these headers in case the requesting user does not
have permission to view them, so when debugging you can use a command like
kubectl get flowschemas -o custom-columns="uid:{metadata.uid},name:{metadata.name}"
kubectl get prioritylevelconfigurations -o custom-columns="uid:{metadata.uid},name:{metadata.name}"
to get a mapping of UIDs to names for both FlowSchemas and PriorityLevelConfigurations.
Observability
Metrics
flow_schema
and
priority_level
were inconsistently named flowSchema
and priorityLevel
,
respectively. If you're running Kubernetes versions v1.19 and earlier, you
should refer to the documentation for your version.When you enable the API Priority and Fairness feature, the kube-apiserver exports additional metrics. Monitoring these can help you determine whether your configuration is inappropriately throttling important traffic, or find poorly-behaved workloads that may be harming system health.
apiserver_flowcontrol_rejected_requests_total
is a counter vector (cumulative since server start) of requests that were rejected, broken down by the labelsflow_schema
(indicating the one that matched the request),priority_level
(indicating the one to which the request was assigned), andreason
. Thereason
label will be have one of the following values:queue-full
, indicating that too many requests were already queued,concurrency-limit
, indicating that the PriorityLevelConfiguration is configured to reject rather than queue excess requests, ortime-out
, indicating that the request was still in the queue when its queuing time limit expired.cancelled
, indicating that the request is not purge locked and has been ejected from the queue.
apiserver_flowcontrol_dispatched_requests_total
is a counter vector (cumulative since server start) of requests that began executing, broken down by the labelsflow_schema
(indicating the one that matched the request) andpriority_level
(indicating the one to which the request was assigned).apiserver_current_inqueue_requests
is a gauge vector of recent high water marks of the number of queued requests, grouped by a label namedrequest_kind
whose value ismutating
orreadOnly
. These high water marks describe the largest number seen in the one second window most recently completed. These complement the olderapiserver_current_inflight_requests
gauge vector that holds the last window's high water mark of number of requests actively being served.apiserver_flowcontrol_read_vs_write_current_requests
is a histogram vector of observations, made at the end of every nanosecond, of the number of requests broken down by the labelsphase
(which takes on the valueswaiting
andexecuting
) andrequest_kind
(which takes on the valuesmutating
andreadOnly
). Each observed value is a ratio, between 0 and 1, of a number of requests divided by the corresponding limit on the number of requests (queue volume limit for waiting and concurrency limit for executing).apiserver_flowcontrol_current_inqueue_requests
is a gauge vector holding the instantaneous number of queued (not executing) requests, broken down by the labelspriority_level
andflow_schema
.apiserver_flowcontrol_current_executing_requests
is a gauge vector holding the instantaneous number of executing (not waiting in a queue) requests, broken down by the labelspriority_level
andflow_schema
.apiserver_flowcontrol_request_concurrency_in_use
is a gauge vector holding the instantaneous number of occupied seats, broken down by the labelspriority_level
andflow_schema
.apiserver_flowcontrol_priority_level_request_utilization
is a histogram vector of observations, made at the end of each nanosecond, of the number of requests broken down by the labelsphase
(which takes on the valueswaiting
andexecuting
) andpriority_level
. Each observed value is a ratio, between 0 and 1, of a number of requests divided by the corresponding limit on the number of requests (queue volume limit for waiting and concurrency limit for executing).apiserver_flowcontrol_priority_level_seat_utilization
is a histogram vector of observations, made at the end of each nanosecond, of the utilization of a priority level's concurrency limit, broken down bypriority_level
. This utilization is the fraction (number of seats occupied) / (concurrency limit). This metric considers all stages of execution (both normal and the extra delay at the end of a write to cover for the corresponding notification work) of all requests except WATCHes; for those it considers only the initial stage that delivers notifications of pre-existing objects. Each histogram in the vector is also labeled withphase: executing
(there is no seat limit for the waiting phase).apiserver_flowcontrol_request_queue_length_after_enqueue
is a histogram vector of queue lengths for the queues, broken down by the labelspriority_level
andflow_schema
, as sampled by the enqueued requests. Each request that gets queued contributes one sample to its histogram, reporting the length of the queue immediately after the request was added. Note that this produces different statistics than an unbiased survey would.Note: An outlier value in a histogram here means it is likely that a single flow (i.e., requests by one user or for one namespace, depending on configuration) is flooding the API server, and being throttled. By contrast, if one priority level's histogram shows that all queues for that priority level are longer than those for other priority levels, it may be appropriate to increase that PriorityLevelConfiguration's concurrency shares.apiserver_flowcontrol_request_concurrency_limit
is the same asapiserver_flowcontrol_nominal_limit_seats
. Before the introduction of concurrency borrowing between priority levels, this was always equal toapiserver_flowcontrol_current_limit_seats
(which did not exist as a distinct metric).apiserver_flowcontrol_nominal_limit_seats
is a gauge vector holding each priority level's nominal concurrency limit, computed from the API server's total concurrency limit and the priority level's configured nominal concurrency shares.apiserver_flowcontrol_lower_limit_seats
is a gauge vector holding the lower bound on each priority level's dynamic concurrency limit.apiserver_flowcontrol_upper_limit_seats
is a gauge vector holding the upper bound on each priority level's dynamic concurrency limit.apiserver_flowcontrol_demand_seats
is a histogram vector counting observations, at the end of every nanosecond, of each priority level's ratio of (seat demand) / (nominal concurrency limit). A priority level's seat demand is the sum, over both queued requests and those in the initial phase of execution, of the maximum of the number of seats occupied in the request's initial and final execution phases.apiserver_flowcontrol_demand_seats_high_watermark
is a gauge vector holding, for each priority level, the maximum seat demand seen during the last concurrency borrowing adjustment period.apiserver_flowcontrol_demand_seats_average
is a gauge vector holding, for each priority level, the time-weighted average seat demand seen during the last concurrency borrowing adjustment period.apiserver_flowcontrol_demand_seats_stdev
is a gauge vector holding, for each priority level, the time-weighted population standard deviation of seat demand seen during the last concurrency borrowing adjustment period.apiserver_flowcontrol_demand_seats_smoothed
is a gauge vector holding, for each priority level, the smoothed enveloped seat demand determined at the last concurrency adjustment.apiserver_flowcontrol_target_seats
is a gauge vector holding, for each priority level, the concurrency target going into the borrowing allocation problem.apiserver_flowcontrol_seat_fair_frac
is a gauge holding the fair allocation fraction determined in the last borrowing adjustment.apiserver_flowcontrol_current_limit_seats
is a gauge vector holding, for each priority level, the dynamic concurrency limit derived in the last adjustment.apiserver_flowcontrol_request_wait_duration_seconds
is a histogram vector of how long requests spent queued, broken down by the labelsflow_schema
(indicating which one matched the request),priority_level
(indicating the one to which the request was assigned), andexecute
(indicating whether the request started executing).Note: Since each FlowSchema always assigns requests to a single PriorityLevelConfiguration, you can add the histograms for all the FlowSchemas for one priority level to get the effective histogram for requests assigned to that priority level.apiserver_flowcontrol_request_execution_seconds
is a histogram vector of how long requests took to actually execute, broken down by the labelsflow_schema
(indicating which one matched the request) andpriority_level
(indicating the one to which the request was assigned).apiserver_flowcontrol_watch_count_samples
is a histogram vector of the number of active WATCH requests relevant to a given write, broken down byflow_schema
andpriority_level
.apiserver_flowcontrol_work_estimated_seats
is a histogram vector of the number of estimated seats (maximum of initial and final stage of execution) associated with requests, broken down byflow_schema
andpriority_level
.apiserver_flowcontrol_request_dispatch_no_accommodation_total
is a counter vec of the number of events that in principle could have led to a request being dispatched but did not, due to lack of available concurrency, broken down byflow_schema
andpriority_level
. The relevant sorts of events are arrival of a request and completion of a request.
Debug endpoints
When you enable the API Priority and Fairness feature, the kube-apiserver
serves the following additional paths at its HTTP[S] ports.
/debug/api_priority_and_fairness/dump_priority_levels
- a listing of all the priority levels and the current state of each. You can fetch like this:kubectl get --raw /debug/api_priority_and_fairness/dump_priority_levels
The output is similar to this:
PriorityLevelName, ActiveQueues, IsIdle, IsQuiescing, WaitingRequests, ExecutingRequests, DispatchedRequests, RejectedRequests, TimedoutRequests, CancelledRequests catch-all, 0, true, false, 0, 0, 1, 0, 0, 0 exempt, <none>, <none>, <none>, <none>, <none>, <none>, <none>, <none>, <none> global-default, 0, true, false, 0, 0, 46, 0, 0, 0 leader-election, 0, true, false, 0, 0, 4, 0, 0, 0 node-high, 0, true, false, 0, 0, 34, 0, 0, 0 system, 0, true, false, 0, 0, 48, 0, 0, 0 workload-high, 0, true, false, 0, 0, 500, 0, 0, 0 workload-low, 0, true, false, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0
/debug/api_priority_and_fairness/dump_queues
- a listing of all the queues and their current state. You can fetch like this:kubectl get --raw /debug/api_priority_and_fairness/dump_queues
The output is similar to this:
PriorityLevelName, Index, PendingRequests, ExecutingRequests, VirtualStart, workload-high, 0, 0, 0, 0.0000, workload-high, 1, 0, 0, 0.0000, workload-high, 2, 0, 0, 0.0000, ... leader-election, 14, 0, 0, 0.0000, leader-election, 15, 0, 0, 0.0000,
/debug/api_priority_and_fairness/dump_requests
- a listing of all the requests that are currently waiting in a queue. You can fetch like this:kubectl get --raw /debug/api_priority_and_fairness/dump_requests
The output is similar to this:
PriorityLevelName, FlowSchemaName, QueueIndex, RequestIndexInQueue, FlowDistingsher, ArriveTime, exempt, <none>, <none>, <none>, <none>, <none>, system, system-nodes, 12, 0, system:node:127.0.0.1, 2020-07-23T15:26:57.179170694Z,
In addition to the queued requests, the output includes one phantom line for each priority level that is exempt from limitation.
You can get a more detailed listing with a command like this:
kubectl get --raw '/debug/api_priority_and_fairness/dump_requests?includeRequestDetails=1'
The output is similar to this:
PriorityLevelName, FlowSchemaName, QueueIndex, RequestIndexInQueue, FlowDistingsher, ArriveTime, UserName, Verb, APIPath, Namespace, Name, APIVersion, Resource, SubResource, system, system-nodes, 12, 0, system:node:127.0.0.1, 2020-07-23T15:31:03.583823404Z, system:node:127.0.0.1, create, /api/v1/namespaces/scaletest/configmaps, system, system-nodes, 12, 1, system:node:127.0.0.1, 2020-07-23T15:31:03.594555947Z, system:node:127.0.0.1, create, /api/v1/namespaces/scaletest/configmaps,
Debug logging
At -v=3
or more verbose the server outputs an httplog line for every
request, and it includes the following attributes.
apf_fs
: the name of the flow schema to which the request was classified.apf_pl
: the name of the priority level for that flow schema.apf_iseats
: the number of seats determined for the initial (normal) stage of execution of the request.apf_fseats
: the number of seats determined for the final stage of execution (accounting for the associated WATCH notifications) of the request.apf_additionalLatency
: the duration of the final stage of execution of the request.
At higher levels of verbosity there will be log lines exposing details of how APF handled the request, primarily for debug purposes.
Response headers
APF adds the following two headers to each HTTP response message.
X-Kubernetes-PF-FlowSchema-UID
holds the UID of the FlowSchema object to which the corresponding request was classified.X-Kubernetes-PF-PriorityLevel-UID
holds the UID of the PriorityLevelConfiguration object associated with that FlowSchema.
What's next
For background information on design details for API priority and fairness, see the enhancement proposal. You can make suggestions and feature requests via SIG API Machinery or the feature's slack channel.