[release-4.9] Bug 2068084: manually disable defrag #810

tjungblu · 2022-05-02T08:28:48Z

No description provided.

openshift-ci · 2022-05-02T08:29:00Z

@tjungblu: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ASSIGNED instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to target a release in 4.10.0, 4.10.z, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different 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.

tjungblu · 2022-05-02T10:18:29Z

/retest-required

openshift-ci · 2022-05-02T12:03:57Z

@tjungblu: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

dusk125 · 2022-05-04T15:18:55Z

pkg/operator/defragcontroller/defragcontroller.go

 	}
-	return factory.New().ResyncEvery(9*time.Minute).WithInformers(
+	return factory.New().ResyncEvery(compactionInterval+1*time.Minute).WithInformers( // attempt to sync outside of etcd compaction interval to ensure maximum gain by defragmentation.


For readability, consider adding parentheses to compactionInterval+1*time.MInute so as not to rely on operator precedence.

yeah good point, I haven't actually touched that one. That originated here: aa7ff87#diff-dfbff74503d147025fe53162fb01aa0bb184ce736fbe346c6f333eef37ebb432R55

and just came through with the backport

ack then we should leave as-is and maybe fix it in later revision (and backport), because I believe (I checked the go spec to be sure) but this will evaluate to compactionInterval+(1*time.Minute) which I don't believe is what we want, from the change I would assume we wanted (compactionInterval+1)*time.Minute.

Disregard this, the code is correct: compactionInterval is already a time.Duration and so the 1*time.Minute happening first is correct to add a minute onto the compactionInterval.

I think it does what was originally intended, the latter doesn't compile as it overflows int64:
https://go.dev/play/p/pAWgMRwvqOC

dusk125 · 2022-05-05T16:28:53Z

/lgtm

openshift-bot · 2022-05-06T01:00:33Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2022-05-06T01:00:37Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ASSIGNED instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to target a release in 4.10.0, 4.10.z, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different 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-bot · 2022-05-07T01:00:47Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2022-05-07T01:00:52Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ASSIGNED instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to target a release in 4.10.0, 4.10.z, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different 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-bot · 2022-05-08T01:00:47Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2022-05-08T01:00:51Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ASSIGNED instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to target a release in 4.10.0, 4.10.z, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different 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-bot · 2022-05-09T01:00:50Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2022-05-09T01:00:55Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ASSIGNED instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to target a release in 4.10.0, 4.10.z, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different 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-bot · 2022-05-10T01:00:26Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2022-05-10T01:00:31Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ASSIGNED instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to target a release in 4.10.0, 4.10.z, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different 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.

tjungblu · 2022-05-10T08:47:30Z

/bugzilla refresh

openshift-ci · 2022-05-10T08:47:39Z

@tjungblu: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is MODIFIED instead
expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to target a release in 4.10.0, 4.10.z, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different 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-bot · 2022-05-11T01:00:55Z

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

openshift-ci · 2022-05-11T01:01:04Z

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, which is invalid:

expected dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 to be in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but it is ON_QA instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different 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.

tjungblu · 2022-05-11T06:52:13Z

/bugzilla refresh

openshift-ci · 2022-05-11T06:52:22Z

@tjungblu: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2068084, 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.

6 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target release (4.9.z) matches configured target release for branch (4.9.z)
bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)
dependent bug Bugzilla bug 2079725 is in the state VERIFIED, which is one of the valid states (VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE))
dependent Bugzilla bug 2079725 targets the "4.10.z" release, which is one of the valid target releases: 4.10.0, 4.10.z
bug has dependents

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @geliu2016

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.

geliu2016

/lgtm
/label cherry-pick-approved

hasbro17 · 2022-05-11T17:15:15Z

/label backport-risk-assessed
/approve

openshift-ci · 2022-05-11T17:16:35Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dusk125, geliu2016, hasbro17, tjungblu

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [hasbro17]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

openshift-ci · 2022-05-11T17:19:15Z

@tjungblu: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

openshift/cluster-etcd-operator#810

Bugzilla bug 2068084 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.

Bug 2079724: manually disable defrag

72975ba

openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/severity-high Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is high for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels May 2, 2022

openshift-ci bot requested review from hasbro17 and ironcladlou May 2, 2022 08:29

tjungblu mentioned this pull request May 4, 2022

Bug 2063183: Upping defrag timeout to 1 minute #762

Merged

dusk125 reviewed May 4, 2022

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot assigned dusk125 May 5, 2022

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 5, 2022

openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot requested a review from geliu2016 May 11, 2022 06:52

geliu2016 approved these changes May 11, 2022

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot assigned geliu2016 May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot added the backport-risk-assessed Indicates a PR to a release branch has been evaluated and considered safe to accept. label May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 11, 2022

openshift-merge-robot merged commit ba4019f into openshift:release-4.9 May 11, 2022

tjungblu deleted the defrag_cherry49 branch May 12, 2022 06:11

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[release-4.9] Bug 2068084: manually disable defrag #810

[release-4.9] Bug 2068084: manually disable defrag #810

tjungblu commented May 2, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 2, 2022

tjungblu commented May 2, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 2, 2022

dusk125 May 4, 2022

tjungblu May 4, 2022 •

edited

dusk125 May 4, 2022

dusk125 May 4, 2022

tjungblu May 4, 2022

dusk125 commented May 5, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 6, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 6, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 7, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 7, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 8, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 8, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 9, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 9, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 10, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 10, 2022

tjungblu commented May 10, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 10, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 11, 2022

tjungblu commented May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 11, 2022

geliu2016 left a comment

hasbro17 commented May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 11, 2022

[release-4.9] Bug 2068084: manually disable defrag #810

[release-4.9] Bug 2068084: manually disable defrag #810

Conversation

tjungblu commented May 2, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 2, 2022

tjungblu commented May 2, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 2, 2022

dusk125 May 4, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tjungblu May 4, 2022 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dusk125 May 4, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dusk125 May 4, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tjungblu May 4, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

dusk125 commented May 5, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 6, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 6, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 7, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 7, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 8, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 8, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 9, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 9, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 10, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 10, 2022

tjungblu commented May 10, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 10, 2022

openshift-bot commented May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 11, 2022

tjungblu commented May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 11, 2022

geliu2016 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

hasbro17 commented May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 11, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented May 11, 2022

tjungblu May 4, 2022 •

edited