Bug 1737575: DR: use observed directories vs assumptions for backup_etcd_client_certs #1052
Conversation
|
@hexfusion: This pull request references a valid Bugzilla bug. 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. 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-ci-robot
added
bugzilla/valid-bug
|
@hexfusion: This pull request references a valid Bugzilla 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. |
|
/test e2e-restore-cluster-state |
Looks good to me! Doing for 1..10 is definitely a poor way of discovering the pods. |
templates/master/00-master/_base/files/usr-local-bin-openshift-recovery-tools-sh.yaml
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
templates/master/00-master/_base/files/usr-local-bin-openshift-recovery-tools-sh.yaml
Show resolved
Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: Sam Batschelet <sbatsche@redhat.com>
hexfusion
force-pushed
the
fx_etcd_backup
branch
from
f7d28a1
to
d073939
Compare
|
@hexfusion: This pull request references a valid Bugzilla 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. |
|
/test e2e-restore-cluster-state |
|
/lgtm |
|
/pony Twilight Sparkle |
|
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. |
|
/approve |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
@hexfusion once this merged and soaks for a few days you'll have to open another pr/cherrypick this to get it backported into 4.1.z if necessary. |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: alaypatel07, hexfusion, kikisdeliveryservice, retroflexer, runcom 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 |
|
/test e2e-aws |
/test e2e-aws-upgrade |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
|
e2e-restore-cluster-state is broken @vrutkovs has some fixes he's working on for it. |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
2 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. |
|
@hexfusion: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged. The Bugzilla bug 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. |
|
@hexfusion: 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. |
|
/cherrypick release-4.1 |
|
@hexfusion: new pull request created: #1054 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. |
Currently, we use a poor assumption that the static pod revision will never go higher than 10[1]. As reported in BZ and confirmed with masters team this is not the case. While the controller would set a MaxEligibleRevision[2] this does mean a linear 0 -> N meaning although
0 - 9is valid so is20 - 29. So we no longer assume instead we populate an array with observed directories output from ls.[1]https://github.com/openshift/machine-config-operator/compare/master...hexfusion:fx_etcd_backup?expand=1#diff-df2f7b2c367c15c3aa83f8b8e002b3d8L37
[2] https://github.com/openshift/library-go/blob/a5507e7eb29c0ec68b73bd355cf5d248586fd776/pkg/operator/staticpod/prune/cmd.go#L56
Fixes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1737575