Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Revisit the documentation with respect to the concepts of Job and Workload #4286

Open
1 task done
mimowo opened this issue Feb 17, 2025 · 6 comments
Open
1 task done
Labels
kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.

Comments

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor

mimowo commented Feb 17, 2025

/kind documentation

What would you like to be added:

Historically Kueue was only for "Jobs", so there was a clear 1:1 mapping between user's Job (and thus user's workload) and Kueue Workload API. This is no longer the case since:

  • we support serving workloads too (Deployments, StatefulSets, LWS)
  • for some user workloads Kueue creates multiple Workload API objects (like for Deployment or LWS), this is by design to allow scaling which is very important for serving workloads.

To reflect that I would like to revisit the documentation, specifically:

  • change Jobs to Workload in most places of the documentation
  • add a note to the documentation that historically Kueue supported Jobs but we not support serving workloads too, so we say Workload
  • when we want to refer to the internal Kueue Workload API object in the documentation, to make it non-ambigous I would suggest consistent naming like "Kueue's Workload API", "Kueue's Workload API object" or "internal Workload API object" (we can decide during review about the specific term.

Why is this needed:

To avoid confusions which has already been encountered a couple of times.

Completion requirements:

This enhancement requires the following artifacts:

  • Docs update

The artifacts should be linked in subsequent comments.

@mimowo mimowo added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Feb 17, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. label Feb 17, 2025
@tenzen-y
Copy link
Member

I guess that we want to consider what is appropriate name instead of Jobs something like Task? Workload (this conflict with Workload API)? Application?

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor Author

mimowo commented Feb 17, 2025

cc @dgrove-oss

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor Author

mimowo commented Feb 17, 2025

I guess that we want to consider what is appropriate name instead of Jobs something like Task? Workload (this conflict with Workload API)? Application?

I'm ok with Task, but would need to see how this presents itself in the docs.

@tenzen-y
Copy link
Member

I guess that we want to consider what is appropriate name instead of Jobs something like Task? Workload (this conflict with Workload API)? Application?

I'm ok with Task, but would need to see how this presents itself in the docs.

SGTM

@mimowo
Copy link
Contributor Author

mimowo commented Feb 19, 2025

cc @PBundyra who is also looking into improvements for docs

@dgrove-oss
Copy link
Contributor

I agree that using something other than Job in the documentation as the generic name for the user-level "thing Kueue manages" is desirable. Job has a strong connotation of "batch job" and there is also the confusion between a generic Job and a batch/v1 Job.

I wish I could come up with a good synonym for workload that we weren't already using. Failing that, I do still think that overloading workload to mean both the user's notion of a workload and Kueue's Workload API object would still be an improvement. If we consistently said "Kueue Workload" for the later, that might be enough.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants