Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

flaky: TestMergeGateways/BasicMergeGateways #3290

Closed
zirain opened this issue Apr 28, 2024 · 6 comments · Fixed by #3331 or #3344
Closed

flaky: TestMergeGateways/BasicMergeGateways #3290

zirain opened this issue Apr 28, 2024 · 6 comments · Fixed by #3331 or #3344
Assignees
Milestone

Comments

@zirain
Copy link
Contributor

zirain commented Apr 28, 2024

https://github.com/envoyproxy/gateway/actions/runs/8865654957/job/24342242631

@zirain zirain added the triage label Apr 28, 2024
@shawnh2 shawnh2 self-assigned this Apr 28, 2024
@shawnh2
Copy link
Contributor

shawnh2 commented May 6, 2024

By debugging this, found that gateway

and gateway

may cause racing status handling since they have same listener settings (even if is on purpose), we cannot predict either which gateway finally got accepted or which gateway reports conflicted.

so the workaround here is to manully apply merged-gateway-4 that has the same listener settings as in merged-gateway-3, so we can make sure the merged-gateway-4 always has conflicted listener.

@shawnh2 shawnh2 reopened this May 7, 2024
@shawnh2
Copy link
Contributor

shawnh2 commented May 7, 2024

the conflicted gateway could not get expected status, since EG will recompute each resources status, the Conflict status may randomly falls on gateway-3 or gateway-4.

so here're 2 ways to solve this:

  • create gateway-3 also manually like what we did to gateway-4, but cannot promise this e2e test case to be stable
  • create gateway-3 and gateway-4 in manifest file like the old way, but check conflict status to be in one of them

let's go with way-2, the way-1 is basically the same as old commit.

@shawnh2
Copy link
Contributor

shawnh2 commented May 17, 2024

Copy link

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had activity in the last 30 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Jun 28, 2024
@shawnh2
Copy link
Contributor

shawnh2 commented Jul 15, 2024

closed in favor of #3845

@shawnh2 shawnh2 closed this as completed Jul 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
3 participants