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

Improve cluster requirements page's OS requirements #1463

Open
embik opened this issue Jun 13, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

Improve cluster requirements page's OS requirements #1463

embik opened this issue Jun 13, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
lifecycle/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness.

Comments

@embik
Copy link
Member

embik commented Jun 13, 2023

https://docs.kubermatic.com/kubermatic/v2.22/architecture/requirements/cluster-requirements/ is kind of a confusing page. It lists OS requirements for the nodes in master clusters - Why? KKP should run on any Kubernetes cluster, we do not interact with the underlying node. IMHO this should be removed.

Seed clusters are not mentioned at all, but they should. We should also point out additional resource requirements with MLA.

The user cluster requirements are also very unclear. Why give a list of OSes here? We only allow deploying with specifics OSes, but that is documented in https://docs.kubermatic.com/kubermatic/v2.22/architecture/compatibility/os-support-matrix/. This section should only link to that, at best. Giving resource requirements for user clusters is also weird, we should just mention that node sizing shouldn't be under a certain threshold. But KKP doesn't really require any specific set of resources in a user cluster, most of the deployed system components are DaemonSets.

This page should also mention KubeOne as the recommended installer IMHO.

@kubermatic-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
After a furter 30 days, they will turn rotten.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@kubermatic-bot kubermatic-bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Sep 11, 2023
@embik
Copy link
Member Author

embik commented Sep 12, 2023

/remove-lifecycle stale

@kubermatic-bot kubermatic-bot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Sep 12, 2023
@kubermatic-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
After a furter 30 days, they will turn rotten.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle stale

@kubermatic-bot kubermatic-bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Dec 11, 2023
@embik
Copy link
Member Author

embik commented Dec 12, 2023

/remove-lifecycle stale

@kubermatic-bot kubermatic-bot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Dec 12, 2023
@embik embik added the lifecycle/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness. label Dec 12, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lifecycle/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants