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

Ensure Seed client is invalidated after deletion #2587

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 17, 2020

Conversation

timebertt
Copy link
Member

How to categorize this PR?

/area quality
/kind bug
/priority normal

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR ensures the seed clients are invalidated after the seed deletion.
This wasn't always the case before, because the seed lease controller always requeues the Seed also after successful deletion and could therefore create a new clientset again, even though the seed might already have been completely deleted.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Release note:

A bug has been fixed, which caused Seed clients not to be invalidated properly on Seed deletion.

@timebertt timebertt requested a review from a team as a code owner July 14, 2020 11:42
@gardener-robot gardener-robot added area/quality Output qualification (tests, checks, scans, automation in general, etc.) related kind/bug Bug priority/normal labels Jul 14, 2020
@timuthy
Copy link
Contributor

timuthy commented Jul 14, 2020

This wasn't always the case before, because the seed lease controller always requeues the Seed also after successful deletion and could therefore create a new clientset again, even though the seed might already have been completely deleted.

Is this because of the stale seedlister cache?

Tbh, I'm a bit concerned by this distributed invalidation handling. I'm currently working on a PR and it struck me because the invalidation happend too early :(

@timuthy
Copy link
Contributor

timuthy commented Jul 17, 2020

@tim-ebert shall we merge this change and think about a general solution later or what would you prefer?

@timebertt
Copy link
Member Author

shall we merge this change and think about a general solution later

Yes, I think that makes sense.
Let's try to figure out a proper way to do it later.

Copy link
Contributor

@timuthy timuthy left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm

@timuthy timuthy merged commit 66f27f1 into gardener:master Jul 17, 2020
@timebertt timebertt deleted the fix/invalidate-seed-client branch July 17, 2020 11:16
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/quality Output qualification (tests, checks, scans, automation in general, etc.) related kind/bug Bug
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants