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

deflake grace period for pod deletion in node e2e #89379

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Mar 24, 2020
Merged

deflake grace period for pod deletion in node e2e #89379

merged 1 commit into from Mar 24, 2020

Conversation

derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member

What type of PR is this?
/kind flake

What this PR does / why we need it:
Timing window appears too tight in e2e setup for kubelet to have delete recorded with API.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #85762

Special notes for your reviewer:

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/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 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 Mar 23, 2020
@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member Author

will discuss in sig-node 3/24
/hold

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Mar 23, 2020
@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member Author

/milestone v1.18

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.18 milestone Mar 23, 2020
@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member Author

/assign @dchen1107

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: derekwaynecarr

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 sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. and removed needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Mar 23, 2020
mattjmcnaughton
mattjmcnaughton reviewed Mar 23, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mattjmcnaughton mattjmcnaughton left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I missed the meeting, but some small readability nits. Thanks for doing this - in favor of any change that helps make the tests more stable.

test/e2e/node/pods.go
@@ -55,9 +55,9 @@ var _ = SIGDescribe("Pods Extended", func() {
/*
Release : v1.15
Testname: Pods, delete grace period
Description: Create a pod, make sure it is running. Using the http client send a 'delete' with gracePeriodSeconds=30. Pod SHOULD get deleted within 30 seconds.
Description: Create a pod, make sure it is running. Using the http client send a 'delete' with gracePeriodSeconds=30. Pod SHOULD get terminated within gracePeriodSeconds and removed from API server within a window.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: Worth adding a ballpark range for the window value? I.e. is it minutes, 10s of minutes, etc...

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

the window is not specific right now, 30s is too tight. 2x30s was still not perfect based on @liggitt past attempts, but trying 3x30s to see if we can still ensure the function works while we work out more precise SLA for kubelet deleting the pod from the API server.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Gotcha! Could be helpful to have that info in the commit message or as a comment so someone looking at this in the future doesn't need to return to the pr description.

test/e2e/node/pods.go
@@ -117,8 +117,11 @@ var _ = SIGDescribe("Pods Extended", func() {

ginkgo.By("verifying the kubelet observed the termination notice")

// allow up to 3x grace period (which allows process termination)
// for the kubelet to remove from api. need to follow-up on if this
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: Worth adding a brief description, either here or in the commit message, around how we arrived at 3 as the multiplier?

@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member Author

ok, well, at least we didnt flake on this test.

would prefer we merge this so we can keep testing core function, and then in sig-node we need to figure out a plan to establish more precise metrics for kubelet reporting status changes back to api server on pod deletion.

@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member Author

/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Mar 24, 2020
@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member Author

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce

@derekwaynecarr
Copy link
Member Author

/assign tallclair

@tallclair
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

Doesn't seem ideal, but I don't have a better solution. Do we have any ideas why it might take so long to terminate?

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 24, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit dfe8380 into kubernetes:master Mar 24, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot modified the milestones: v1.18, v1.19 Mar 24, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mattjmcnaughton mattjmcnaughton mattjmcnaughton left review comments

@krmayankk krmayankk Awaiting requested review from krmayankk

@yujuhong yujuhong Awaiting requested review from yujuhong

Assignees

@dchen1107 dchen1107

@tallclair tallclair

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/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.19
5 participants
@derekwaynecarr @k8s-ci-robot @tallclair @mattjmcnaughton @dchen1107