Change:
- --memory={{ base_eventer_memory }} - --extra-memory={{ eventer_memory_per_node }}Ki - --threshold=5 <del> - --deployment=heapster-v1.5.0-beta.0 </del> <ins> - --deployment=heapster-v1.5.0-beta.1 </ins> - --container=eventer - --poll-period=300000 - --estimator=exponential

Discussion:
I also hit when running cri-containerd as the container runtime. The reason is that we don't populate stats like in cri-containerd integration now. is adding the containerd support in cadvisor, after that we should have full summary metrics. However, heapster should not panic in this case anyway. Can we cut a heapster patch release and update heapster in the main repo?
+1. Many new CRI integration would run into this issue.
In fact, as far as I am aware, not a single CRI implementation currently implements any of the stats calls.
I beg to differ: That's the reason why filed the issue.
Yeah does implement the CRI stats. Currently it only support core metrics, which is only part of summary api. We are working on integration with cadvisor, before that some fields in summary api such as will be nil. Current heapster version will crash when is nil, which shouldn't happen. :)
/cc
My bad, thanks for the pointer :slightlysmilingface:. I'll correct my statement: I believe no CRI implementation except for cri-containerd implements the stats calls. The ones I explicitly checked are: dockershim, cri-o, rktlet.
Something I'm wondering about though: The intention of the stats calls is in order to be able to get rid of cAdvisor. Making the stats calls depend on cAdvisor seems to cover up the issues it has. Re:
Here is the reason that we still have to integrate with cadvisor for now.
/cc
If I understand correctly this is meant as a migration mean, so that both are possible for some time, and then we drop cAdvisor once a reasonable migration period has been granted.
[MILESTONENOTIFIER] Milestone Issue Current <details open<summaryIssue Labels</summary- : Issue will be escalated to these SIGs if needed. : Escalate to the issue owners and SIG owner; move out of milestone after several unsuccessful escalation attempts. : Fixes a bug discovered during the current release. </details<details<summaryHelp</summary<ul<li<a href=""Additional instructions</a</li<li<a href=""Commands for setting labels</a</li</ul</details
I will take a look at Heapster and try to fix this. Can you advise how to reproduce the issue?

This will help a lot with debugging and verifying a fix once it's ready.
this is already fixed at head and 1.4.3 version of heapster The problem that is using kubernetes version from head and we have there 1.5.0-beta.0: I see two possible solutions: version of heapster to 1.4.3 at head of kubernetes. Piotr mentioned that 1.5.0 has still a lot of problems, so it maybe makes sense. a new release of heapster (1.5.0-beta.1) and after that bump version at head.
And thanks for taking this issue.
Not directly related to this issue: a more general discussion is at We'd like to understand which fields are required and optional in heapster, so that we won't crash heapster with partial result.
We've merged a work around for now Hopefully it works. But anyway, we should fix this in 1.9.
what needs to be done for 1.9 here?
we'll need an assignee as well
We just need to update heapster version.