Update eck pdb docs #2361

naemono · 2025-08-01T14:28:50Z

The following elastic/cloud-on-k8s#8780 is planned to be released with the ECK 3.2/Stack 9.2 release. How do we tag this specifically for that?

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

github-actions · 2025-08-01T14:30:50Z

🔍 Preview links for changed docs

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

shainaraskas

provided a suggestion with the info at hand. might need some adjustment depending on the impact of the stack version on this process.

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

shainaraskas · 2025-08-01T19:16:36Z

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

-ECK manages a default PDB per {{es}} resource. It allows one {{es}} Pod to be taken down, as long as the cluster has a `green` health. Single-node clusters are not considered highly available and can always be disrupted.
+ECK manages either a single default PDB, or multiple PDBs per {{es}} resource according to the license available.
+
+## Enterprise licensed customers


Suggested change

## Enterprise licensed customers

## Enterprise licensed customers

```{applies_to}

deployment:

eck: ga 3.2

```

I've implemented this suggestion, but why do we note ga here?

you can view ga as the default - we just want record the lifecycle state so it's clear the what state of the feature was in the indicated version. ga in the frontend doesn't render - only the version # renders.

I am not super happy with these headings:

wording: we do not license customers, customers buy a license from us

correctness: non-enterprise users are technically not customers but users (they did not buy anything?)

I would rather we lead with the feature difference than the license (which needs to be mentioned too no argument about that)

Suggestion:

Advanced PodDisruptionBudget logic (Enterprise License Required) Default PodDisruptionBudget logic (Basic License)

Thoughts? @shainaraskas @naemono

I have updated the headings, but I've used the word rules rather than logic. It seemed to be more clear. Let me know if you feel the opposite.

Rules is good too I think 👍

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

shainaraskas · 2025-08-01T19:19:31Z

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

+
+It allows one {{es}} Pod to be taken down, as long as the cluster has a `green` health. Single-node clusters are not considered highly available and can always be disrupted.

 In the {{es}} specification, you can change the default behavior as follows:


do the instructions below this line only apply to non-enterprise? if not, you might want to change the headings a little:

## Default behavior ... ### Enterprise licensed customers ... ### Non-enterprise licensed customers ... ## Override the default behavior ... ## Pod disruption budget ...

I have also made this suggestion, as the instructions apply to both licensed and non-licensed customers. I'll see how it turns out when it deploys...

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

shainaraskas

looks good. have a few more suggestions for you - let me know if you'd like me to commit a pass of them

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

shainaraskas · 2025-09-09T19:38:10Z

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

 [`maxUnavailable`](https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/run-application/configure-pdb/#arbitrary-controllers-and-selectors) cannot be used with an arbitrary label selector, therefore `minAvailable` is used in this example.
 ::::

+## Pod disruption budget per nodeSet [k8s-pdb-per-nodeset]


should this be a child of the override instructions? wonder if it makes sense to indicate at the top of the "override" section that you can do it at either of these levels, and then put the examples each under a H3

let me know if you'd like me to make a commit with my suggested changes

I've added these as indicated. Let me know if the changes make sense.

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

Updates the ECK Pod Disruption Budget documentation to reflect new enterprise-licensed behavior introduced in ECK 3.2, where different PDB handling is provided based on license type.

Adds distinction between enterprise and non-enterprise licensed behavior for PDB management
Documents new per-nodeSet PDB creation for enterprise licenses with role-specific health requirements
Reorganizes content structure with clearer sections and updated examples

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

shainaraskas

approving to unblock but please fix those heading levels before shipping :)

shainaraskas · 2025-10-01T20:17:14Z

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

+
+In {{eck}} clusters that do not have an enterprise license, one {{es}} Pod can be taken down at a time, as long as the cluster has a health status of `green`. Single-node clusters are not considered highly available and can always be disrupted.
+
+### Overriding the default behavior


we still need to fix these heading levels per this comment #2361 (comment)

easiest way is to make this an H2 and its child an H3. alternative is outlined in the linked thread

I have adjusted the headings. I swore I had previously done this, but clearly not. Let me know if this is what you intended.

barkbay

The following elastic/cloud-on-k8s#8780 is planned to be released with the ECK 3.2/Stack 9.2 release.

A bit off topic: this PR is targeting main, do we want to target a release branch instead, as we did for 3.1? (mostly to make life easier for the next release manager)

naemono · 2025-10-03T15:04:15Z

The following elastic/cloud-on-k8s#8780 is planned to be released with the ECK 3.2/Stack 9.2 release.

A bit off topic: this PR is targeting main, do we want to target a release branch instead, as we did for 3.1? (mostly to make life easier for the next release manager)

I have both created an eck-3.2.0 branch, and adjusted this PR to go into that branch. 👍

pebrc · 2025-10-06T08:30:54Z

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

+
+In {{eck}} clusters that do not have an enterprise license, one {{es}} Pod can be taken down at a time, as long as the cluster has a health status of `green`. Single-node clusters are not considered highly available and can always be disrupted.
+
+### Overriding the default behavior


deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

pebrc · 2025-10-06T08:47:42Z

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

-ECK manages a default PDB per {{es}} resource. It allows one {{es}} Pod to be taken down, as long as the cluster has a `green` health. Single-node clusters are not considered highly available and can always be disrupted.
+ECK manages either a single default PDB, or multiple PDBs per {{es}} resource according to the license available.
+
+## Enterprise licensed customers


I am not super happy with these headings:

wording: we do not license customers, customers buy a license from us

correctness: non-enterprise users are technically not customers but users (they did not buy anything?)

I would rather we lead with the feature difference than the license (which needs to be mentioned too no argument about that)

Suggestion:

Advanced PodDisruptionBudget logic (Enterprise License Required) Default PodDisruptionBudget logic (Basic License)

Thoughts? @shainaraskas @naemono

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

pebrc

A few more nits around capitalization and how the headings render. Otherise lgtm.

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

shainaraskas

new headings and heading nesting looks good. couple of small comments while I'm here

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

naemono added 2 commits August 1, 2025 10:24

Adjusting ECK PDB documentation for upcoming changes.

fd4bc26

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

Adjust wording.

eb666da

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

naemono requested a review from a team as a code owner August 1, 2025 14:28

shainaraskas reviewed Aug 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

Update docs per suggestion.

9f29bba

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

shainaraskas reviewed Sep 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

naemono added 3 commits September 30, 2025 15:37

Review comments.

34821aa

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

Merge branch 'main' into update-eck-pdb-docs

6804c57

Note about single node clusters.

f358c99

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

naemono requested review from barkbay, Copilot, kvalliyurnatt, pebrc and rhr323 September 30, 2025 21:57

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 30, 2025

View reviewed changes

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Update hierarchy

673a03f

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

pebrc reviewed Oct 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

Review comments.

36562d1

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

naemono requested review from Copilot, pebrc and shainaraskas October 1, 2025 14:58

Copilot AI reviewed Oct 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

shainaraskas approved these changes Oct 1, 2025

View reviewed changes

barkbay reviewed Oct 2, 2025

View reviewed changes

naemono changed the base branch from main to eck-3.2.0 October 3, 2025 15:03

naemono requested a review from barkbay October 3, 2025 15:04

pebrc reviewed Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

Review changes

4dd6471

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

naemono requested review from pebrc and shainaraskas October 6, 2025 14:20

pebrc reviewed Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

more review comments.

7a27175

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

naemono requested a review from pebrc October 6, 2025 18:25

shainaraskas approved these changes Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md Show resolved Hide resolved

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

pebrc approved these changes Oct 7, 2025

View reviewed changes

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

deploy-manage/deploy/cloud-on-k8s/pod-disruption-budget.md Show resolved Hide resolved

Review changes.

7ef7c67

Signed-off-by: Michael Montgomery <[email protected]>

naemono merged commit 42e6cc5 into elastic:eck-3.2.0 Oct 7, 2025
6 checks passed

naemono deleted the update-eck-pdb-docs branch October 7, 2025 14:10

-## Enterprise licensed customers
+## Enterprise licensed customers
+```{applies_to}
+deployment:
+  eck: ga 3.2
+```


		It allows one {{es}} Pod to be taken down, as long as the cluster has a `green` health. Single-node clusters are not considered highly available and can always be disrupted.

		In the {{es}} specification, you can change the default behavior as follows:


		In {{eck}} clusters that do not have an enterprise license, one {{es}} Pod can be taken down at a time, as long as the cluster has a health status of `green`. Single-node clusters are not considered highly available and can always be disrupted.

		### Overriding the default behavior

Update eck pdb docs #2361

Update eck pdb docs #2361

Uh oh!

Conversation

naemono commented Aug 1, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-actions bot commented Aug 1, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

🔍 Preview links for changed docs

Uh oh!

shainaraskas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shainaraskas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

shainaraskas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

barkbay left a comment • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

naemono commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

naemono commented Aug 1, 2025 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Aug 1, 2025 •

edited

Loading

barkbay left a comment •

edited

Loading