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

Chart's InitContainers Don't Specify CPU and Memory Limits #1154

Open
nicoprow opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #1180
Open

Chart's InitContainers Don't Specify CPU and Memory Limits #1154

nicoprow opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #1180
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@nicoprow
Copy link
Contributor

BPDM Chart's initContainers do not have CPU and memory limits specified.
Since they are very basic jobs they should come with a very small CPU and memory footprint.
I don't think it is even necessary to make those limits configurable as I don't see the point of giving a basic delaying container more limit than is absolutely needed.

We should determine the minimum needed and assign it to the deployment file.

Relates to issues like https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/bpdm/security/code-scanning/4627 and https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/bpdm/security/code-scanning/4659

@nicoprow nicoprow added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 10, 2024
@nicoprow nicoprow added this to the BPDM v6.3.0 / R25.03. milestone Dec 10, 2024
@nicoprow nicoprow moved this to New in BPDM Kanban Dec 10, 2024
@nicoprow nicoprow self-assigned this Dec 10, 2024
@nicoprow nicoprow moved this from New to 🔖 Refined in BPDM Kanban Dec 13, 2024
@nicoprow nicoprow linked a pull request Jan 14, 2025 that will close this issue
2 tasks
@nicoprow nicoprow moved this from 🔖 Refined to 👀 In review in BPDM Kanban Jan 15, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
Status: 👀 In review
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant