### Ein Prozess pro Container

In einem solchen Szenario möchten Sie wahrscheinlich **einen einzelnen (Uvicorn-)Prozess pro Container** haben, da Sie die Replikation bereits auf Cluster ebene durchführen würden.

				// buffer than the data itself, but the results are in-fact valid. So we validate
				// this error condition specifically treating it as a good condition with valid
				// results. In this scenario return 'n' is always lesser than the input buffer.
				if err == io.ErrUnexpectedEOF {
					if !bytes.Equal(testCase.expectedBuf, buf[:n]) {

	if fi.VersionPurgeStatus().Empty() && (fi.DeleteMarkerReplicationStatus() == "REPLICA" || fi.DeleteMarkerReplicationStatus().Empty()) {
		updateVersion = fi.MarkDeleted
	} else {
		// for replication scenario
		if fi.Deleted && fi.VersionPurgeStatus() != Complete {
			if !fi.VersionPurgeStatus().Empty() || fi.DeleteMarkerReplicationStatus().Empty() {
				updateVersion = true
			}
		}

offset,\n    /** @prop {Number|String} offset=0\n     * The offset value as described in the modifier description\n     */\n    offset: 0,\n  },\n\n  /**\n   * Modifier used to prevent the popper from being positioned outside the boundary.\n   *\n   * A scenario exists where the reference itself is not within the boundaries.<br />\n   * We can say it has \"escaped the boundaries\" — or just \"escaped\".<br />\n   * In this case we need to decide whether the popper should either:\n   *\n   * - detach from...

- Do not remove the "batch.kubernetes.io/job-tracking" finalizer from a Pod, in a corner
  case scenario, when the Pod is controlled by an API object which is not a batch Job

- The scheduling queue didn't notice any extenders' failures, it could miss some cluster events,
  and it could end up Pods rejected by Extenders stuck in unschedulable pod pool in 5min in the worst-case scenario.

* enhance the daemonset sync logic in clock-skew scenario ([#77208](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/77208), [@DaiHao](https://github.com/DaiHao))

* [GCE] Enable by default audit logging truncating backend. ([#68288](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/68288), [@loburm](https://github.com/loburm))
* kubeadm: fix a possible scenario where kubeadm can pull much newer control-plane images ([#69301](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/69301), [@neolit123](https://github.com/neolit123))

more information, see [#53356](https://issue.k8s.io/53356#issuecomment-333748618).

* A performance issue was identified in large-scale clusters when deleting thousands of pods simultaneously across hundreds of nodes. Kubelets in this scenario can encounter temporarily increased latency of `delete pod` API calls -- above the target service level objective of 1 second. If you run clusters with this usage pattern and if pod deletion latency could be an issue for you, you might want to wait...

- The scheduling queue didn't notice any extenders' failures, it could miss some cluster events,
  and it could end up Pods rejected by Extenders stuck in unschedulable pod pool in 5min in the worst-case scenario.
  Now, the scheduling queue notices extenders' failures and requeue Pods rejected by Extenders appropriately. ([#122043](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/122043), [@sanposhiho](https://github.com/sanposhiho)) [SIG Scheduling]