GCP UPI: relax cluster name #3713
Conversation
This mirrors changes to GCP IPI in openshift#3544 The infra id of the clusters on GCP was reduced to 12 in openshift#2088 because we couldn't handle the hostname seen by rhcos machine to be greater than 64. More details on this are available in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809345 now since BZ 1809345 is fixed by openshift/machine-config-operator#1711 and openshift/cluster-api-provider-gcp#88 the installer can relax the restriction on the infra-id to match the other platforms. Why is it important? On GCP all resources are prefixed with infra-id, which currently is 12 chars with 6 chars used by random bit, leaving only 6 chars from cluster name. This causes trouble associating the cluster to jobs in CI as most of the identifyable characters are dropped from the resource names in CI due to this restriction. Also because of the previous restriction, only one char are used from pool's name, making is higly likely to collide in cases there are more.
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
/test e2e-gcp-upi |
This change updates the upi-gcp-install step to be able to use the full word 'master' in the name of control plane nodes. It maintains compatiblity with the the older 'm' naming convention by looking at which one was used in the 05_control_plane.py template. openshift/installer#3713
|
/retest |
|
/test e2e-gcp-upi |
This change updates the upi-gcp-install step to be able to use the full word 'worker' in the name of compute nodes. It maintains compatiblity with the the older 'w' naming convention by looking at if 'm' or 'master' is used in control_plane.py per openshift#9490. openshift/installer#3713 openshift#9490
|
/retest |
1 similar comment
|
/retest |
|
/test e2e-gcp-upi |
|
/retest |
jstuever
changed the title
openshift-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
/retest |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: abhinavdahiya 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-robot
added
the
approved
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
3 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. |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
@jstuever: 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. |
This mirrors changes to GCP IPI in #3544
The infra id of the clusters on GCP was reduced to 12 in #2088 because
we couldn't handle the hostname seen by rhcos machine to be greater than
64.
More details on this are available in
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1809345
now since BZ 1809345 is fixed by openshift/machine-config-operator#1711
and openshift/cluster-api-provider-gcp#88 the installer can relax the
restriction on the infra-id to match the other platforms.
Why is it important?
On GCP all resources are prefixed with infra-id, which currently is 12
chars with 6 chars used by random bit, leaving only 6 chars from cluster
name. This causes trouble associating the cluster to jobs in CI as most
of the identifyable characters are dropped from the resource names in CI
due to this restriction.
Also because of the previous restriction, only one char are used from
pool's name, making is higly likely to collide in cases there are more.