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
OADP-1067: Add queuing for VSB and VSR #190
Conversation
@eemcmullan: This pull request references OADP-1067 which is a valid jira issue. 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. |
@eemcmullan: This pull request references OADP-1067 which is a valid jira issue. 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. |
@eemcmullan: This pull request references OADP-1067 which is a valid jira issue. 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. |
Please add a logic to decrement processingVSBs where if deletionTimestamp is not nil, and if InProgress.. Otherwise update status to say deletion waiting for volsync to process etc. |
@eemcmullan Please add the suggested changes and resolve the conflicts on this PR |
@kaovilai @shubham-pampattiwar I think when we discussed the batching originally, we wanted to add to processing VSBs once volsync completed. If we wait until VSBs and its resources are cleaned-up/deleted, it will take longer. |
@eemcmullan But that would mean the VSB/VSR controller is still processing instance of VSB/VSR in reality but the batchingStatus would show things differently. |
The concern here is that I got into a scenario where I deleted VSB before volsync completes.. which means nothing ever got moved to "Completed" which means the |
VSM controller should account for and handle unexpected/force deletions of VSBs and account for them in the processingVSBs variable. Alternatively.. on a recurring basis check number of existing in-progress VSBs and use that to reset the processingVSBs variable. Relying on status of available (not yet deleted) VSBs moving to complete for decrementing may not be reliable. |
@kaovilai gotcha. Will update to fix shortly |
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.
/lgtm
if !vsb.DeletionTimestamp.IsZero() { | ||
// if batchingStatus is completed then processingVSBs has already been decremented | ||
if vsb.Status.BatchingStatus != "" && vsb.Status.BatchingStatus != volsnapmoverv1alpha1.SnapMoverBackupBatchingCompleted { | ||
processingVSBs-- | ||
} |
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.
Hopefully we can do similar thing for VSR
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.
that's the plan
if !vsb.DeletionTimestamp.IsZero() { | ||
// if batchingStatus is completed then processingVSBs has already been decremented |
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.
Here the comment does not match with the condition, are we checking for BatchingStatus == completed
or BatchingStatus != completed
?
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.
So processingVSBs
already gets decremented once SnapMoverBackupBatchingCompleted
. Therefore we would not want to decrement again if a VSB has that status but then starts to be deleted, because then it would be decremented twice for a single VSB
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: eemcmullan, kaovilai, shubham-pampattiwar 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 |
dataMoverImageFqin: 'quay.io/emcmulla/data-mover:batching'