feat: scaledown

VERSION

@@ -1 +1 @@
-1.2.0
+1.2.0-scaledown

issue_analysis/issues_to_analyze.md

@@ -0,0 +1,16 @@
+
+# Argo Rollouts Issues Analysis
+
+| Issue Name | Description | Supporting Evidence / Useful Links | Notes |
+|------------|-------------|-----------------------------------|-------|
+| Support scaleDownDelaySeconds & fast rollbacks with canary strategy | Currently argo-rollouts only supports fast-track rollback when a canary deployment is in progress. The enhancement requests adding support for keeping the previous version around for scaleDownDelaySeconds (similar to blue-green strategy) to allow fast rollback for canary deployments in case metric checks don't catch regressions. | [GitHub Issue #557](https://github.com/argoproj/argo-rollouts/issues/557) | Blue-green strategy already supports this feature with scaleDownDelaySeconds. This would bring feature parity between deployment strategies and improve rollback capabilities for canary deployments. |
+| Argo-rollouts ignores maxSurge and maxUnavailable when traffic shifting is used | When traffic shifting is used, argo-rollouts ignores the maxSurge and maxUnavailable settings, which can impact cluster autoscaling by putting additional pressure on Karpenter to binpack or provide new nodes. | [Support scaleDownDelaySeconds & fast rollbacks with canary strategy](https://github.com/argoproj/argo-rollouts/issues/557) | Can have impact on cluster autoscaling putting additional pressure on karpenter to binpack or provide new nodes. Combined with flaky health checks and aggressive autoscaling that larger services might be unwittingly using, this can lead to long deployment times per cluster. |
+| Argo-rollouts waits for stable RS to be stable before scaling it down | When used on a large scale with a cluster autoscaler that can disrupt nodes and evict pods, the canary RS stays scaled-up for a while until the stable RS is fully scaled. This makes sense if the controller scaled down the stable RS during the rollout (using dynamicStableScale), but it doesn't make sense if it didn't. | [GitHub PR #3899](https://github.com/argoproj/argo-rollouts/pull/3899) | This behavior can cause resource inefficiency and increased costs when the stable RS wasn't scaled down during rollout but the canary RS remains scaled up unnecessarily. |
+
+argo-rollouts
+
+argo-rollouts waits for stable RS to be stable before scaling it down
+
+https://github.com/argoproj/argo-rollouts/pull/3899 
+
+ When used on a large scale with a cluster autoscaler that can disrupt nodes and evict pods, the canary RS stays scaled-up for a while until the stable RS is fully scaled. This makes sense if the controller scaled down the stable RS during the rollout (using dynamicStableScale), but it doesn't make sense if it didn't.

issue_analysis/point_scale.md

@@ -0,0 +1,334 @@
+We have agreed to use the following for our story pointing guideline.
+
+![point scale table](point_scale_table.png)
+
+Additional pointers on Story Points
+
+    We should target breaking tickets up into as small size as possible that result in value being delivered in “logical chunks”. 
+
+    We should aim to have a majority of 1, 2, 3 point tickets, slightly fewer 5 point tickets, and fewer still 8 point tickets.
+
+    Where possible tickets that could span multiple sprints should be avoided.
+
+    In a week long Dodo sprint, 8 point tickets are high risk and should be avoided if possible.
+
+        It’s OK to give tickets 8 and 13 points, but try to consider them to be placeholder tickets that are indicating work that needs more research and to be broken up into smaller tickets.
+
+        In no circumstance will a 13 point ticket be allowed into a sprint.
+
+
+
+Everything below this line are notes taken from courses on the topic of Sprint management.  They are included here for information on good practise and may be of interest, but should not be taken as gospel for Dodo.
+Creating tickets/stories/tasks (currently just notes, will refine as we progress)
+
+Reduce scope as much as is reasonable.  The Pareto principle.
+DoD (not acceptance criteria):
+
+Focus on the valuable outcomes - What matters to our customers?
+
+Evolve over time based on feedback and experience.
+
+Keep it as concise as possible.
+
+Don’t overthink edge-cases.
+
+Make it visible to any and all stakeholders.
+
+Examples:
+
+    How do we test?
+
+    “stuff is tested” - What does this mean specifically?
+
+    Response times?
+
+    …
+
+The Sprint
+
+Required elements of a sprint:
+
+    What do we want to achieve? - Goal
+
+    How will we achieve it? - Plan
+
+    How will we keep on track? - Scrum
+
+    How will we know if we achieved it? - Review
+
+    How will we do better next time? - Retro
+
+We need all of the above together for each individual piece to make sense. (Think a stone arch - take one block out & it will collapse).
+Sprint Planning
+
+Inputs
+
+    Objective
+
+    Backlog
+
+    Product increment
+
+    Capacity & past performance
+
+    1 improvement from retro
+
+Outputs
+
+    Sprint backlog (the board with lots of tickets initially in “Todo”)
+
+
+
+
+Sprint Backlog
+
+The Board.
+
+The team’s plan to achieve the Sprint Goal.
+
+It will change and adapt as more is learnt throughout the Sprint.
+
+    Add tickets and remove them as additional details are learnt.
+
+    Changes in scope are fine.
+
+    If you bring things in do other tickets have to go out? (Probably)
+
+    Should you adjust your goal? (Hopefully not, but possible if necessary)
+
+    If change happens regularly, it’s a symptom of not enough planning.
+
+    Predict the predictable, embrace the surprises.
+
+Daily Scrum
+
+Assess the current state of the plan.
+
+NOT just a status update.
+
+“Are we on track?  If not, what should be do about it?”
+Sprint Review
+
+We don’t do this very well in Skyscanner.
+
+Have a separate Zoom link for Planning, Review & Retro.
+
+Opportunity for stakeholders to be present
+
+Gain perspective.
+
+What has been accomplished this sprint?
+
+What challenges has we experienced?
+
+What might come next and are there any risks?
+
+Discuss what competitors have done recently.
+
+Discuss market changes and future opportunities.
+
+    Recent example: ChatGPT - What does this mean for us?
+
+        Should we explore ways to use it?
+
+        Should we put it on our PDTs?
+
+        New libraries new, frameworks?
+
+Sprint Retro
+
+How we worked together in the sprint
+
+The retro is explicitly about seeking improvements
+
+Consider:
+
+    Individuals
+
+    Interactions
+
+    Processes
+
+    Tools
+
+    DoD
+
+Select >= 1 action from the discussion to improve the next sprint.
+
+Some kind of retro should happen each sprint, it may be that it can be a small thing for one or two weeks then a bigger thing on the next week.
+
+Occasionally the retro should be highly focused on a specific topic.
+
+Don’t just do the same retro format each week.  Can be the same most weeks, but mix it up liven things up and focus on different aspects of the sprint.
+Overall
+
+Timeboxed (<1 month) at a consistent duration.
+
+Sprints deliver value by solving a meaningful problem.  Would a stakeholder be willing to spend time (or money) to upgrade to what you do in that sprint.
+
+Sprints protect the team from distractions and changes in direction.
+Scrum Team
+
+    Cross functional
+
+        Multi-skilled
+
+    Stable composition of a team
+
+        Constantly changing team limits psychological safety
+
+        Difficult to understand strengths and weaknesses.
+
+    <= 10 people
+
+    Self-organising
+
+        Leaders will emerge
+
+        Different people will naturally start to take different roles.
+
+        Squad leads should encourage self-organisation
+
+    Non-hierarchical
+
+        Different levels will have different ideas and different input.
+
+        Sometimes less experienced people will see simpler solutions, for example.
+
+        Fresh perspective can be valuable
+
+Developer
+
+Contributor to any aspect of a usable increment each sprint.
+
+Able to plan the work to the goal and execute it.
+Product Owner
+
+Accountable for maximising the value of the product resulting from the work on the Scrum Team.
+
+Accountable (not necessarily responsible) for:
+
+    Developing and explicitly communicating the product goal
+
+    Creating and comms for the Product Backlog
+
+    Ordering (prioritising) the product backlog
+
+    Ensure the product backlog is transparent, visible and understood.
+
+Note for Prod Plat context: This doesn’t exist, role mostly falls to SL, but should be shared amongst the team.
+Scrum Master
+
+Servant leader.  Accountable for establishing Scrum as defined in the Scrum Guide.  They do this by helping everyone understand Scrum Theory and practice, both within the Scrum Team and the org.
+
+    Coach team members in self-org
+
+    Help team focus on high value increments
+
+    Cause the removal of impediments
+
+    Ensure all Scrum Events are positive, productive & efficient.
+
+    Should be active and challenge the team during ceremonies.
+
+Should not be rotated too quickly (if at all), no less than a month at a time.  Less than this doesn’t give the chance to make a change.
+Backlog Refinement
+
+An ongoing activity, by a very rough estimate it could take up to 10% of the Sprint capacity.
+
+Backlog refinement should be a discovery exercise, working towards everybody understanding the work/roadmap.  Constantly strive to understand what’s coming up for the product.  Where are we today?  What could we do to improve going forwards?  Understand how other people in the company, or other people in the industry, are solving problems.
+
+Creating Sprint-ready backlog items
+
+    Re-prioritise
+
+    New tickets created
+
+    Unnecessary tickets removed
+
+    Acceptance criteria added
+
+    Larger tickets (or epics) broken up into end-to-end slices.
+
+    Tickets are estimated (or thinly sliced to the same size)
+
+Ticket Template can be useful, some ideas for it:
+
+    What is the change?
+
+    Why are we making it?
+
+    Any useful links?
+
+    Testing steps?
+
+    Acceptance criteria.
+
+Estimation
+
+Watch the Agile Estimation Skyscanner University course for more detail.
+
+    Should be quick & painless
+
+    Should be collaborative involving the whole team
+
+    The closer the work, the less valuable the estimate is in its own right and the more valuable the conversation is.
+
+    Don’t get stuck between 2s and 3s - not a valuable conversation.  Remove one from consideration?
+
+        Plandek - Look at average time to deliver story points; 2 and 3 points often have no difference.
+
+    The are estimates, not quotes, not commitments, not promises or guarantees.
+
+Forecasting progress
+
+    Velocity: speed = distance / time
+
+        Monte carlo estimation - probability based forecasting.
+
+    Don’t plan the unplannable
+
+        If there are unknowns, use larger brush strokes, refining the brush as we go along.
+
+        Combined Explore Question Mark
+
+    Use data to understand typical progress and trends
+
+        Stakeholders will appreciate this.
+
+    Don’t be lured by optimistic/pessimistic tendencies.
+
+        Predict based on the data and trends you have.
+
+Burndown charts
+
+Plot expected progress vs actual progress
+
+Not be-all-end-all, but useful.
+
+Can be used mid-sprint to check if you’re on track.
+When Scrum works and when it doesn’t
+
+Scrums works pretty well most of the time.
+
+Works well for complex problems with…
+
+    unpredictabilty
+
+    unknown-unknowns
+
+    established general direction
+
+Other models such as Kanban can work better for complicated problems:
+
+    Predictable aspects
+
+    Some unknowns, but mostly understoof
+
+    Established end state
+
+Could start with Scrum and when problems become complicated rather than complex you could move to Kanban.
+
+
+
+