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

[ws-daemon] Currectly use limit writer #4969

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 27, 2021

Conversation

csweichel
Copy link
Contributor

@csweichel csweichel commented Jul 27, 2021

This PR enables the use of the limitWriter in ws-daemon. While previously existing, it was not used (anymore?). In the same vein, I've removed the storage-specific maximum backup configuration. Instead, we're now using a single size to determine how large a workspace can be:

WorkspaceSizeLimit quota.Size `json:"workspaceSizeLimit"`

/cc @meysholdt
this has potentially config breaking changes

fixes #4961

@roboquat roboquat requested a review from meysholdt July 27, 2021 12:44
@roboquat
Copy link
Contributor

@csweichel: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: this, has, potentially, config, breaking, changes.

Note that only gitpod-io members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

In response to this:

This PR enables the use of the limitWriter in ws-daemon. While previously existing, it was not used (anymore?). In the same vein, I've removed the storage-specific maximum backup configuration. Instead, we're now using a single size to determine how large a workspace can be:

WorkspaceSizeLimit quota.Size `json:"workspaceSizeLimit"`

/cc @meysholdt this has potentially config breaking changes

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@csweichel
Copy link
Contributor Author

/approve

@csweichel
Copy link
Contributor Author

/auto-cc

@roboquat roboquat requested review from aledbf and fntlnz July 27, 2021 12:45
@aledbf
Copy link
Member

aledbf commented Jul 27, 2021

/lgtm

@roboquat
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 22a765a0947aef31d876a23bf914539f66e6ffc3

@roboquat
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aledbf, csweichel

Associated issue: #4961

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@csweichel
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold

@meysholdt should be aware of this change

@csweichel
Copy link
Contributor Author

/hold cancel

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jul 27, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #4969 (cdf8180) into main (fd1dcee) will increase coverage by 31.09%.
The diff coverage is 0.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           main    #4969       +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage      0   31.09%   +31.09%     
=========================================
  Files         0       71       +71     
  Lines         0    14746    +14746     
=========================================
+ Hits          0     4585     +4585     
- Misses        0     9744     +9744     
- Partials      0      417      +417     
Flag Coverage Δ
components-content-service-app 14.47% <ø> (?)
components-content-service-lib 14.47% <ø> (?)
components-image-builder-app 34.44% <ø> (?)
components-image-builder-mk3-app 6.53% <ø> (?)
components-supervisor-app 36.95% <ø> (?)
components-ws-daemon-app 22.28% <0.00%> (?)
components-ws-manager-app 36.37% <ø> (?)
components-ws-proxy-app 67.13% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
components/content-service/pkg/storage/gcloud.go 3.12% <ø> (ø)
components/content-service/pkg/storage/minio.go 0.00% <ø> (ø)
components/ws-daemon/pkg/content/service.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/routes.go 83.64% <0.00%> (ø)
...s/content-service/pkg/service/workspace-service.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...image-builder-mk3/pkg/orchestrator/orchestrator.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
...onents/content-service/pkg/service/blob-service.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/infoprovider.go 50.34% <0.00%> (ø)
components/supervisor/pkg/dropwriter/dropwriter.go 73.46% <0.00%> (ø)
components/supervisor/pkg/supervisor/git.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
... and 64 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update fd1dcee...cdf8180. Read the comment docs.

@roboquat roboquat merged commit 7f25cc0 into main Jul 27, 2021
@roboquat roboquat deleted the csweichel/review-test-for-limit-4961 branch July 27, 2021 12:56
jankeromnes added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2021
roboquat pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Review test for "limit-writer" because in prod "limit-writer" is broken
3 participants