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
Added events for failures in PV/PVC processing. #89845
Conversation
Hi @yuga711. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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. |
/ok-to-test |
@yuga711: Cannot trigger testing until a trusted user reviews the PR and leaves an In response to this:
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. |
/assign @msau42 |
/ok-to-test |
/retest |
1 similar comment
/retest |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you squash your commits and also make the PR title more descriptive? We don't use the git merge flow for this project.
/kind cleanup |
- PV has a dangling reference to a PVC - PVC is trying to bind to a PV that already references a different PVC Change-Id: Ic509d39808763149b02b4dd52347edb74a8803fd
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: msau42, yuga711 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 |
/retest Review the full test history for this PR. Silence the bot with an |
2 similar comments
/retest Review the full test history for this PR. Silence the bot with an |
/retest Review the full test history for this PR. Silence the bot with an |
@yuga711: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
/retest Review the full test history for this PR. Silence the bot with an |
@@ -424,6 +426,9 @@ func (ctrl *PersistentVolumeController) syncUnboundClaim(claim *v1.PersistentVol | |||
// This should never happen because someone had to remove | |||
// AnnBindCompleted annotation on the claim. | |||
klog.V(4).Infof("synchronizing unbound PersistentVolumeClaim[%s]: volume already bound to different claim %q by controller, THIS SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN", claimToClaimKey(claim), claimrefToClaimKey(volume.Spec.ClaimRef)) | |||
claimMsg := fmt.Sprintf("volume %q already bound to a different claim.", volume.Name) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems the two calls to ctrl.eventRecorder.Event added by this PR have the same arguments.
Note the comment on line 426.
How about changing the message as in the following ?
claimMsg := fmt.Sprintf("should not have happened: volume %q already bound to a different claim.", volume.Name)
This would allow users to distinguish the two events added.
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: