Do not probe so aggressively which may lead to unnecessary restarts

[luxas]

@errordeveloper @mikedanese PTAL

I came across a case where etcd restarted about 5-10 times because the load was very high on the machine.
The load seems to have lead to that the etcd container occasionally didn't respond to the probe, which caused many restart and made the whole thing even worse.

Maybe we should remove the etcd probe totally? I don't know, what do you think?
This is at least a try to loosen the limits here...

---

This change is

[k8s-ci-robot]

Jenkins unit/integration failed for commit b0fb446. Full PR test history.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot unit test this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue when you hit one in your PR.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Jenkins GCE e2e failed for commit b0fb446. Full PR test history.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot gce e2e test this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue when you hit one in your PR.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Jenkins GCI GKE smoke e2e failed for commit b0fb446. Full PR test history.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot gci gke e2e test this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue when you hit one in your PR.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Jenkins GKE smoke e2e failed for commit b0fb446. Full PR test history.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot gke e2e test this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue when you hit one in your PR.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Jenkins GCI GCE e2e failed for commit b0fb446. Full PR test history.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot gci gce e2e test this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue when you hit one in your PR.

[errordeveloper]

Those were copied from @mikedanese's Jsonnet definitions in Kubernetes
Anywhere, which I assumed were good enough. It must be the same in whatever
kube-up has... Also, some of the resource requests were found a bit odd in
other static pods, which were sourced from the same place. @bboreham might
recall exact numbers.

On Fri, 30 Sep 2016, 21:53 k8s-ci-robot, notifications@github.com wrote:

Jenkins Kubemark GCE e2e failed
https://k8s-gubernator.appspot.com/build/kubernetes-jenkins/pr-logs/pull/33859/kubernetes-pull-build-test-kubemark-e2e-gce/1971/
for commit 4edd40f
4edd40f.
Full PR test history http://pr-test.k8s.io/33859.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot kubemark e2e test
this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues?q=is:issue+label:kind/flake+is:open
when you hit one in your PR.

—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
#33859 (comment),
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAPWSzSsZFDhp1b9LBZDeqSkNMiDSzS3ks5qvXasgaJpZM4KLd6f
.

[mikedanese]

You should just add a failure threshold. Do we know if this will even help?

[k8s-ci-robot]

Jenkins Kubemark GCE e2e failed for commit 6027477. Full PR test history.

The magic incantation to run this job again is @k8s-bot kubemark e2e test this. Please help us cut down flakes by linking to an open flake issue when you hit one in your PR.

[luxas]

@errordeveloper Does this look good to you?

[errordeveloper]

LGTM

[k8s-github-robot]

@k8s-bot test this [submit-queue is verifying that this PR is safe to merge]