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

Revert changes to WaitForStableCluster in scheduler e2e test #84988

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 8, 2019
Merged

Revert changes to WaitForStableCluster in scheduler e2e test #84988

merged 1 commit into from Nov 8, 2019

Conversation

ahg-g
Copy link
Member

@ahg-g ahg-g commented Nov 8, 2019 •
edited

What type of PR is this?

/kind flake

What this PR does / why we need it:
#84806 changed the condition for waiting for a "stable cluster" in e2e tests. Originally we waited for all pods in the system to schedule, #84806 changed that to wait until there are no pods in any namespace other than kube-system (and be in scheduled state).

The reason we did that is because we wanted to wait until pods that were created by other tests to actually be deleted, and the assumption was that those pods are created in namespaces other than kube-system.

We don't have good insight to why this didn't work since we don't have enough logs from the test. For now, this PR reverts to the old condition, and in a follow up PR we will try another approach to wait for pods that are subject to deletion to actually get deleted. Perhaps what we should wait for is for pods in deleted namespaces to disappear.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Partially Fixes #84980

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. kind/flake Categorizes issue or PR as related to a flaky test. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 8, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/test sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 8, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahg-g

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 Nov 8, 2019
@ahg-g
Copy link
Member Author

ahg-g commented Nov 8, 2019

/cc @damemi

@draveness
Copy link
Contributor

can we trigger the conformance test here, or we have to wait for this get merged into master

draveness
draveness reviewed Nov 8, 2019
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@draveness draveness left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

Thanks

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 8, 2019
@damemi
Copy link
Contributor

damemi commented Nov 8, 2019

Did this change break the test further? Or just not address the flake?

@alculquicondor
Copy link
Member

"Partially fixes" in the PR description will still close the issue. Is that intended?

@ahg-g
Copy link
Member Author

ahg-g commented Nov 8, 2019

"Partially fixes" in the PR description will still close the issue. Is that intended?

Broke it further.

@ahg-g
Copy link
Member Author

ahg-g commented Nov 8, 2019

"Partially fixes" in the PR description will still close the issue. Is that intended?

It actually fixes that specific flake, so should be fixes rather than partially.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit ed3cc6a into kubernetes:master Nov 8, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.17 milestone Nov 8, 2019
@ahg-g ahg-g deleted the ahg-stablecluster branch January 10, 2020 15:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@draveness draveness draveness left review comments

@alculquicondor alculquicondor Awaiting requested review from alculquicondor

@wgliang wgliang Awaiting requested review from wgliang

@damemi damemi Awaiting requested review from damemi

Assignees

@draveness draveness

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/test cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/flake Categorizes issue or PR as related to a flaky test. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/scheduling Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Scheduling. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.17
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Failing test] Conformance-GCE-master (ci-kubernetes-gce-conformance-latest)
5 participants
@ahg-g @k8s-ci-robot @draveness @damemi @alculquicondor