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.

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

Bug 1989550: Increase keystoneauth's connection pool size #546

Merged

Conversation

dulek
Copy link
Contributor

@dulek dulek commented Aug 3, 2021

With Kuryr running up to 1000 greenthreads, the default urllib3 pool
size of 10 is way too little. This commit increases it on the
keystoneauth side, effectively setting it for the openstacksdk
connections.

Change-Id: I2ee06734ece04c2707f2ac95060bd451f0725089

With Kuryr running up to 1000 greenthreads, the default urllib3 pool
size of 10 is way too little. This commit increases it on the
keystoneauth side, effectively setting it for the openstacksdk
connections.

Change-Id: I2ee06734ece04c2707f2ac95060bd451f0725089
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/severity-low Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is low for the branch this PR is targeting. label Aug 3, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 3, 2021

@dulek: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1988379, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.9.0" release, 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:

Bug 1988379: Increase keystoneauth's connection pool size

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 openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Aug 3, 2021
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 3, 2021
@dulek dulek changed the base branch from master to release-4.8 August 3, 2021 12:39
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 3, 2021

@dulek: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1988379, which is invalid:

  • expected the bug to target the "4.8.z" release, but it targets "---" instead
  • expected Bugzilla bug 1988379 to depend on a bug targeting a release in 4.9.0 and in one of the following states: VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE), but no dependents were found

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:

Bug 1988379: Increase keystoneauth's connection pool size

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.

@dulek dulek changed the title Bug 1988379: Increase keystoneauth's connection pool size Bug 1989550: Increase keystoneauth's connection pool size Aug 3, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 3, 2021

@dulek: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

Bug 1989550: Increase keystoneauth's connection pool size

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.

@MaysaMacedo
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 9, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 9, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dulek, MaysaMacedo

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-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 10, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 11, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 12, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 13, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 14, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 15, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 16, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 17, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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
Copy link
Contributor

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 18, 2021

@openshift-bot: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is invalid:

  • expected dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 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:

/bugzilla refresh

Recalculating validity in case the underlying Bugzilla bug has changed.

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.

@dulek
Copy link
Contributor Author

dulek commented Aug 18, 2021

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 18, 2021

@dulek: An error was encountered querying GitHub for users with public email (juriarte@redhat.com) for bug 1989550 on the Bugzilla server at https://bugzilla.redhat.com. No known errors were detected, please see the full error message for details.

Full error message. non-200 OK status code: 403 Forbidden body: "{\n \"documentation_url\": \"https://docs.github.com/en/free-pro-team@latest/rest/overview/resources-in-the-rest-api#secondary-rate-limits\",\n \"message\": \"You have exceeded a secondary rate limit. Please wait a few minutes before you try again.\"\n}\n"

Please contact an administrator to resolve this issue, then request a bug refresh with /bugzilla refresh.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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.

@dulek
Copy link
Contributor Author

dulek commented Aug 18, 2021

/bugzilla refresh

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Aug 18, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 18, 2021

@dulek: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1989550, which is valid.

6 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (4.8.z) matches configured target release for branch (4.8.z)
  • bug is in the state POST, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)
  • dependent bug Bugzilla bug 1988379 is in the state VERIFIED, which is one of the valid states (VERIFIED, RELEASE_PENDING, CLOSED (ERRATA), CLOSED (CURRENTRELEASE))
  • dependent Bugzilla bug 1988379 targets the "4.9.0" release, which is one of the valid target releases: 4.9.0
  • bug has dependents

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @eurijon

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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 openshift-ci bot removed the bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. label Aug 18, 2021
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested a review from eurijon August 18, 2021 10:05
@jupierce jupierce added the cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. label Aug 27, 2021
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit e649690 into openshift:release-4.8 Aug 27, 2021
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 27, 2021

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

Bugzilla bug 1989550 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1989550: Increase keystoneauth's connection pool size

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.

@MaysaMacedo
Copy link
Contributor

/cherry-pick release-4.7

@openshift-cherrypick-robot

@MaysaMacedo: new pull request created: #554

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.7

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. bugzilla/severity-low Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is low for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. cherry-pick-approved Indicates a cherry-pick PR into a release branch has been approved by the release branch manager. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants