Bug 1815203: bindata/etcd: rename DR scripts to cluster-backup and cluster-restore #272
Conversation
hexfusion
changed the title
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
/bugzilla refresh |
|
@hexfusion: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request. 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. |
hexfusion
changed the title
|
@hexfusion: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1815203, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
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. |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
bugzilla/valid-bug
|
Looks straightforward to me. /lgtm |
|
@hexfusion: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1815203, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
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. |
|
/cherrypick release-4.4 |
|
@hexfusion: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-4.4 in a new PR and assign it to you. 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. |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
Signed-off-by: Sam Batschelet <sbatsche@redhat.com>
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: hexfusion, retroflexer 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 Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
2 similar comments
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
/skip |
|
/retest |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
@hexfusion: new pull request created: #273 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. |
|
@hexfusion: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged. Bugzilla bug 1815203 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. 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. |
|
@hexfusion: Bugzilla bug 1815203 is in an unrecognized state (MODIFIED) and will not be moved to the MODIFIED state. 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. |
|
@hexfusion: 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. |
|
Mind that this kind of name change breaks the automation our users have in place. Would you consider creating a symlink and writing a deprecation notice in the release notes? |
|
@fgiloux yes this is a breaking change and should be documented. The reason we made the change was because of racing conditions with MCO that could result in upgrade failures. So I ma afraid the separation was required.
I appreciate the note |
This PR renames the following DR scripts.
etcd-snapshot-backup.sh => cluster-backup.sh
etcd-snapshot-restore.sh => cluster-restore.sh
The name change serves 2 purposes.
1.) The script naming now better reflects the actions of the scripts as we are backing up not only etcd data.
2.) We cause a race in MCO when we write these files to disk with the same name. Although we could have MCD make this work like we did with etcd-member.yaml. I feel that we should take this opportunity to remove ourselves from the MCO paths completely.
In the end the decision was made based on the stability of upgrades from 4.3.
We also remove etcd-member-remove.sh as it does not follow our expected user usage policy. We have introduced
etcdctlcontainer which provides very easy use of etcdctl. Users can run remove from this container vs ssh to disk of cluster.oc rsh ...