Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

encryption: switch to kube-storage-version-migrator #291

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Jan 24, 2020
Merged

encryption: switch to kube-storage-version-migrator #291

merged 2 commits into from Jan 24, 2020

Conversation

vareti
Copy link
Contributor

@vareti vareti commented Jan 9, 2020

continuing the work done in #245

Requires https://github.com/openshift/cluster-kube-storage-version-migrator-operator to be in the release.

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 9, 2020
@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 13, 2020

/retest

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 13, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. and removed needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 13, 2020
@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 14, 2020

/test e2e-aws-operator

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 14, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jan 14, 2020
@vareti vareti changed the title encryption: switch to kube-storage-version-migrator [WIP] encryption: switch to kube-storage-version-migrator Jan 14, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jan 14, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 14, 2020
@vareti vareti changed the title [WIP] encryption: switch to kube-storage-version-migrator encryption: switch to kube-storage-version-migrator Jan 15, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jan 15, 2020
@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 15, 2020

/test e2e-aws-operator

@sanchezl
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 15, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Jan 16, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jan 16, 2020
@sanchezl sanchezl mentioned this pull request Jan 17, 2020
Closed
8 tasks
@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 17, 2020

/retest

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 17, 2020

/test e2e-aws-operator-encryption

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 17, 2020

/test e2e-aws-operator-encryption-perf

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 18, 2020

/retest

2 similar comments
@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 20, 2020

/retest

@sanchezl
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 23, 2020

/test e2e-aws-operator-encryption
/test e2e-aws-operator-encryption-perf

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 23, 2020

/retest

2 similar comments
@sttts
Copy link
Contributor

sttts commented Jan 23, 2020

/retest

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 23, 2020

/retest

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 23, 2020

/test e2e-aws-operator-encryption
/test e2e-aws-operator-encryption-perf

@marun
Copy link
Contributor

marun commented Jan 24, 2020

/retest

@marun
Copy link
Contributor

marun commented Jan 24, 2020

@vareti The failure of the e2e-aws-operator-encryption-perf doesn't appear to be infrastructure related. Is the job flakey, or is it ligit failing?

@marun
Copy link
Contributor

marun commented Jan 24, 2020

/retest

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 24, 2020

@marun it does not look like a infra failure. looks like a timeout from the test logs. and there is not much info in the migrator logs to check what went wrong. i am running this again to see it is flaky

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 24, 2020

/retest

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 24, 2020

/test e2e-aws-operator-encryption-perf

@vareti
Copy link
Contributor Author

vareti commented Jan 24, 2020

@marun So looks like test is indeed flaky. I tried running the same test locally on my machine and it passed there too.

@marun
Copy link
Contributor

marun commented Jan 24, 2020

Hooray, passed!

@sttts
Copy link
Contributor

sttts commented Jan 24, 2020

/approve
/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 24, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sanchezl, sttts, vareti

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 24, 2020
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 3d399a5 into openshift:master Jan 24, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@deads2k deads2k Awaiting requested review from deads2k

@sttts sttts Awaiting requested review from sttts

Assignees

@sttts sttts

@sanchezl sanchezl

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
6 participants
@vareti @sanchezl @sttts @marun @openshift-ci-robot @openshift-merge-robot