OCPBUGS-20331: manifests/0000_90_kube-apiserver-operator_04_servicemonitor-apiserver: Rename to kube-apiserver-performance-recording-rules #1566
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
jira/valid-reference
|
@wking: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-20331, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 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. |
wking
force-pushed
the
rename-api-dashboard
branch
from
dfa90ab
to
95c6349
Compare
|
/close Updated original PR, as it has better description. In case I'm unavailable feel free to reopen and add fixes |
|
@vrutkovs: Closed this PR. 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. |
|
@wking: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-20331. The bug has been updated to no longer refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 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. |
|
I'd like to rebase and add the same kind of pivot to #1551's /reopen |
|
@wking: Reopened this PR. 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. |
|
@wking: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-20331, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 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. |
wking
force-pushed
the
rename-api-dashboard
branch
from
95c6349
to
0b6040b
Compare
|
/retest |
wking
force-pushed
the
rename-api-dashboard
branch
from
0b6040b
to
0412fb3
Compare
wking
changed the title
…: Rename to kube-apiserver-performance-recording-rules Exactly like 7457da4 (manifests: rename API performance dashboard, 2023-10-10, openshift#1565), this pivot: * Turns the original (group, namepspace, name) into a delete manifest, with no capability annotation (all clusters should delete this resource). * Creates a (group, namespace, newName) manifest with the original spec content and capability annotation (only clusters with the cap enabled should have this resource). which allows updates like: 1. Old release with the old (group, namepspace, name) not annotated for a capability. 2. Request update to new release. 3. Outgoing cluster-version operator compares the outgoing manifests with the incoming manifests to decide if any capabilities need to be implicitly enabled: a. It sees that the old (group, namepspace, name) isn't labeled with any capabilities, so no need to implicitly enable anything there. b. It sees that the new (group, namespace, newName) is annotated for the capability, but it doesn't see anything with that g,n,n getting reconciled in the outgoing manifest set, so it thinks "just some new manifest for a capability I do not care about", and does not enable the annotated capability. In a separate pull request than 7457da4, because this one doesn't need to go back to 4.14. The RecordingRule is from 04f36e7 (manifests: add new PrometheusRule for recording rules, 2023-06-28, openshift#1521), which landed in 4.14, so 4.13 clusters do not have a matching (group, namespace, name) manifest to worry about matching.
wking
force-pushed
the
rename-api-dashboard
branch
from
0412fb3
to
acd4178
Compare
|
@wking: The following tests failed, say
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. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: dgrisonnet, wking 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 |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
|
@wking: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-20331: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-20331 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. |
|
Fix included in accepted release 4.15.0-0.nightly-2023-10-31-054858 |
|
/cherry-pick release-4.14 |
|
@sdodson: new pull request created: #1572 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. |
Exactly like 7457da4 (#1565), this pivot:
which allows updates like:
In a separate pull request than 7457da4, because this one doesn't need to go back to 4.14. The RecordingRule is from 04f36e7 (#1521), which landed in 4.14, so 4.13 clusters do not have a matching (kind, group, namespace, name) manifest to worry about matching.