@@ -496,7 +496,7 @@ can use a manifest similar to:
496
496
497
497
<!--
498
498
From that manifest, `topologyKey: zone` implies the even distribution will only be applied
499
- to nodes that are labelled `zone: <any value>` (nodes that don't have a `zone` label
499
+ to nodes that are labeled `zone: <any value>` (nodes that don't have a `zone` label
500
500
are skipped). The field `whenUnsatisfiable: DoNotSchedule` tells the scheduler to let the
501
501
incoming Pod stay pending if the scheduler can't find a way to satisfy the constraint.
502
502
@@ -780,7 +780,7 @@ There are some implicit conventions worth noting here:
780
780
above example, if you remove the incoming Pod's labels, it can still be placed onto
781
781
nodes in zone `B`, since the constraints are still satisfied. However, after that
782
782
placement, the degree of imbalance of the cluster remains unchanged - it's still zone `A`
783
- having 2 Pods labelled as `foo: bar`, and zone `B` having 1 Pod labelled as
783
+ having 2 Pods labeled as `foo: bar`, and zone `B` having 1 Pod labeled as
784
784
`foo: bar`. If this is not what you expect, update the workload's
785
785
`topologySpreadConstraints[*].labelSelector` to match the labels in the pod template.
786
786
-->
@@ -981,7 +981,7 @@ section of the enhancement proposal about Pod topology spread constraints.
981
981
because, in this case, those topology domains won't be considered until there is
982
982
at least one node in them.
983
983
984
- You can work around this by using an cluster autoscaling tool that is aware of
984
+ You can work around this by using a cluster autoscaling tool that is aware of
985
985
Pod topology spread constraints and is also aware of the overall set of topology
986
986
domains.
987
987
-->
0 commit comments