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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Automated cherry pick of #76656: Switch to instance-level update APIs for Azure VMSS loadbalancer operations #76992

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
May 2, 2019
Merged

Automated cherry pick of #76656: Switch to instance-level update APIs for Azure VMSS loadbalancer operations #76992

merged 6 commits into from
May 2, 2019

Conversation

feiskyer
Copy link
Member

Cherry pick of #76656 on release-1.14.

Depends on #76753.

#76656: Switch to instance-level update APIs for Azure VMSS loadbalancer operations

Previously, VMSS API doesn't support configurations for each instance. Hence, Azure cloud provider upgrades manually for all instances whenever loadbalancer backend pools need to be updated. This would cause all instances restarted if there're also some other VMSS model changes.

To fix this issue, the PR switches to instance-level update APIs for Azure VMSS loadbalancer operations. It also upgrades Azure SDK to v21.4.0.

/kind bug
/priority critical-urgent
/sig azure

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved Indicates that a PR is not yet approved to merge into a release branch. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. priority/critical-urgent Highest priority. Must be actively worked on as someone's top priority right now. sig/azure cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Apr 24, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added sig/cloud-provider Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cloud Provider. sig/storage Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Storage. labels Apr 24, 2019
@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

/assign @tpepper @justaugustus @andyzhangx

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

For SIG Azure & Release:
/lgtm
/approve

For deps:
/assign @sttts @cblecker

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 24, 2019
andyzhangx
andyzhangx approved these changes Apr 24, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@andyzhangx andyzhangx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@andyzhangx
Copy link
Member

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-aks-engine-azure

@cblecker
Copy link
Member

/retest
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cblecker, feiskyer, justaugustus

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Apr 24, 2019
@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

/retest

@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big

@justaugustus justaugustus mentioned this pull request Apr 26, 2019
Closed
@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

Commented on the flake issue opened here: #73105 (comment)
/test pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

/test pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big

1 similar comment
@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big

@justaugustus justaugustus added this to Needs Review in Provider Azure Apr 28, 2019
@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

ping @tpepper

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 1, 2019
@tpepper
Copy link
Member

tpepper commented May 1, 2019

I'm worried about the state of azure/storage patch backports. And this one is a good example of why I'm not happy about this. This is a size/XL patch that feels like a new feature enabling as much or more than a critical bug fix.

But it was set to cherry pick to all branches 1.1[1234] and is merged in master (1.15) and 1.11 and 1.12, so it would be really odd to not merge in 1.13 and 1.14. :(

@feiskyer feiskyer force-pushed the cherry-pick-76656-to-1.14 branch from 0c624db to 0bbf72c Compare May 2, 2019 00:17
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels May 2, 2019
@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

feiskyer commented May 2, 2019 •
edited

Rebased because of conflicts.

The cherry pick fixes a critical bug of VMSS: all nodes may be rebooted at the same time on some conditions (see details in #71594).

@tpepper The change is big because of api-version updates. We need this change to ensure that doesn't' happen. Could you help to get this approved for 1.14?

@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

feiskyer commented May 2, 2019

@justaugustus @andyzhangx Need lgtm again because of rebase.

andyzhangx
andyzhangx approved these changes May 2, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@andyzhangx andyzhangx left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 2, 2019
@tpepper tpepper added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label May 2, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/cherry-pick-not-approved Indicates that a PR is not yet approved to merge into a release branch. label May 2, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 318c9d4 into kubernetes:release-1.14 May 2, 2019
Provider Azure automation moved this from Needs Review to Done May 2, 2019
@feiskyer feiskyer deleted the cherry-pick-76656-to-1.14 branch May 2, 2019 23:23
@jgsqware
Copy link

Do you know if this will be release in a 1.14 patch version?

@feiskyer
Copy link
Member Author

@jgsqware yep, this cherry pick should be included in v1.14.2

@jgsqware
Copy link

Nice and any tip when it will go out?

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

@jgsqware -- you can find up-to-date information on patch releases here: https://github.com/kubernetes/sig-release/blob/master/releases/patch-releases.md

@jgsqware
Copy link

Excellent thank you!

@craiglpeters craiglpeters mentioned this pull request May 28, 2019
Closed
@mo-saeed mo-saeed mentioned this pull request Jul 12, 2019
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@andyzhangx andyzhangx andyzhangx approved these changes

@caesarxuchao caesarxuchao Awaiting requested review from caesarxuchao

Assignees

@justaugustus justaugustus

@sttts sttts

@cblecker cblecker

@tpepper tpepper

@andyzhangx andyzhangx

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/critical-urgent Highest priority. Must be actively worked on as someone's top priority right now. sig/cloud-provider Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cloud Provider. sig/storage Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Storage. size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
Provider Azure
  
Done
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
8 participants
@feiskyer @justaugustus @andyzhangx @cblecker @k8s-ci-robot @tpepper @jgsqware @sttts