Bug 1976894: Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned). #1026

miheer · 2022-01-17T08:01:29Z

Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned).
So, with this fix we will return an error saying that we don't support idling of stateful sets as the accessing the routes for the service which is idled does not work. For that a feature work will be required. But, for now we need to add a error whenever a customer tries to idle a stateful service. This commit fixes Bug 1976894.

openshift-ci · 2022-01-17T08:01:33Z

@miheer: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1976894, which is invalid:

expected the bug to target the "4.10.0" 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 1976894: Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned).

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.

miheer · 2022-01-17T08:02:44Z

/bugzilla refresh

openshift-ci · 2022-01-17T08:02:51Z

@miheer: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1976894, which is valid. 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.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

bug is open, matching expected state (open)
bug target release (4.10.0) matches configured target release for branch (4.10.0)
bug is in the state NEW, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @lihongan

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.

Miciah · 2022-01-18T13:22:15Z

pkg/cli/idle/idle.go

+			fmt.Println("Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.")
+			return nil, nil


Is there a reason you need to print here instead of returning an error?

Suggested change

fmt.Println("Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.")

return nil, nil

return nil, fmt.Errorf("idling StatefulSets is not supported")

Also, don't you need three return values here?

Suggested change

fmt.Println("Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.")

return nil, nil

return nil, nil, fmt.Errorf("idling StatefulSets is not supported")

Thanks @Miciah ! return is inside getController := func(ref namespacedOwnerReference) (metav1.Object, error) {

so I will add return nil, fmt.Errorf("idling StatefulSets is not supported") as can't return 3 values.

Is there a reason you need to print here instead of returning an error?

It works fine however the right approach will be to add an error in the return as you mentioned as the return type of the function is error.

return is inside getController := func(ref namespacedOwnerReference) (metav1.Object, error) {

Ah, I see. GitHub doesn't show the indentation correctly.

Thanks @Miciah ! return is inside getController := func(ref namespacedOwnerReference) (metav1.Object, error) {

so I will add return nil, fmt.Errorf("idling StatefulSets is not supported") as can't return 3 values.

@Miciah after adding this I don't see the error message like I do see with this commit as follows -

[miheer@localhost oc]$ ./oc idle nginx
WARNING: idling when network policies are in place may cause connections to bypass network policy entirely
Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.
error: unable to mark the service "nginx/nginx" as idled.
Make sure that the service is not already marked as idled and that it is associated with resources that can be scaled.
See 'oc idle -h' for help and examples.
[miheer@localhost oc]$

After adding the return nil, fmt.Errorf("idling StatefulSets is not supported") it does not show the error

[miheer@localhost oc]$ ./oc idle nginx
WARNING: idling when network policies are in place may cause connections to bypass network policy entirely
error: unable to mark the service "nginx/nginx" as idled.
Make sure that the service is not already marked as idled and that it is associated with resources that can be scaled.
See 'oc idle -h' for help and examples.

BTW I had to make the code changes where get controller is called and where it's error is captured if you want to return error. PTAL.

[miheer@localhost oc]$ ./oc idle nginx
WARNING: idling when network policies are in place may cause connections to bypass network policy entirely
error: no valid scalable resources found to idle: unable to calculate scalable resources for service nginx/nginx: Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.
[miheer@localhost oc]$

Miciah · 2022-01-22T07:16:12Z

pkg/cli/idle/idle.go

+		if err != nil {
+			return nil, err
+		} else if errors.IsNotFound(err) {
 			return nil, fmt.Errorf("unable to load %s %q: %v", controllerRef.Kind, controllerRef.Name, err)
 		}


@miheer, after your change, the else branch is unreachable, isn't it?

Anyway, it seems the logic was broken by an earlier change: https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/22919/files#diff-037051bf889204d52030b00c7a2754f939bb8653b22842a3dc53db1259f433d6L420-R420. The original intention was any errors except not-found errors should be reported.

Suggested change

if err != nil {

return nil, err

} else if errors.IsNotFound(err) {

return nil, fmt.Errorf("unable to load %s %q: %v", controllerRef.Kind, controllerRef.Name, err)

}

if err != nil && !errors.IsNotFound(err) {

return nil, fmt.Errorf("unable to load %s %q: %v", controllerRef.Kind, controllerRef.Name, err)

}

@mfojtik, can you double-check that my analysis of your change and suggestion here are correct?

Miciah · 2022-01-24T16:57:28Z

@soltysh, can you approve this PR?

soltysh · 2022-01-25T14:03:44Z

pkg/cli/idle/idle.go

@@ -268,6 +268,9 @@ func (o *IdleOptions) calculateIdlableAnnotationsByService(infoVisitor func(reso
 		}
 		// just get the unversioned version of this
 		gk := schema.GroupKind{Group: gv.Group, Kind: ref.Kind}
+		if gk.Kind == "StatefulSet" {
+			return nil, fmt.Errorf("Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.")


All errors should be lowercased, ie. idling StatefulSet...

soltysh · 2022-01-25T14:09:19Z

pkg/cli/idle/idle.go

@@ -268,6 +268,9 @@ func (o *IdleOptions) calculateIdlableAnnotationsByService(infoVisitor func(reso
 		}
 		// just get the unversioned version of this
 		gk := schema.GroupKind{Group: gv.Group, Kind: ref.Kind}
+		if gk.Kind == "StatefulSet" {


I'd suggest being more accurate ie.:

if kappsv1.SchemeGroupVersion.WithKind("StatefulSet").GroupKind() == gk { ...

this will ensure that only k8s apps StatefulSet will be ignored.

Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned). So, with this fix we will return an error saying that we don't support idling of stateful sets as the accessing the routes for the service which is idled does not work. For that a feature work will be required. But, for now we need to add a error whenever a customer tries to idle a stateful service.

miheer · 2022-01-28T06:19:38Z

/retest

miheer · 2022-01-28T09:07:25Z

/retest

soltysh

/lgtm
/approve

openshift-ci · 2022-01-28T09:13:03Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: miheer, soltysh

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [soltysh]

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

openshift-bot · 2022-01-28T11:28:56Z

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

openshift-bot · 2022-01-28T14:40:57Z

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

openshift-bot · 2022-01-28T15:28:57Z

/retest-required

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

openshift-ci · 2022-01-28T16:05:40Z

@miheer: all tests passed!

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.

openshift-ci · 2022-01-28T16:06:12Z

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

openshift/oc#1026

Bugzilla bug 1976894 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 1976894: Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned).

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.

Miciah · 2022-01-29T00:57:28Z

/bugzilla refresh

openshift-ci · 2022-01-29T00:57:31Z

@Miciah: Bugzilla bug 1976894 is in an unrecognized state (MODIFIED) and will not be moved to the MODIFIED state.

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 bot added bugzilla/severity-medium Referenced Bugzilla bug's severity is medium for the branch this PR is targeting. bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 17, 2022

openshift-ci bot requested review from deads2k and soltysh January 17, 2022 08:02

openshift-ci bot added bugzilla/valid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is valid for the branch this PR is targeting. and removed bugzilla/invalid-bug Indicates that a referenced Bugzilla bug is invalid for the branch this PR is targeting. labels Jan 17, 2022

openshift-ci bot requested a review from lihongan January 17, 2022 08:02

miheer force-pushed the idle-issue-BZ-1737127 branch from 8a2642b to 251b6db Compare January 17, 2022 13:30

Miciah reviewed Jan 18, 2022

View reviewed changes

miheer force-pushed the idle-issue-BZ-1737127 branch from 251b6db to 13307d7 Compare January 19, 2022 13:09

Miciah mentioned this pull request Jan 22, 2022

utils/errors: remove cruft openshift/origin#22919

Merged

Miciah reviewed Jan 22, 2022

View reviewed changes

miheer force-pushed the idle-issue-BZ-1737127 branch from 13307d7 to 496aae9 Compare January 24, 2022 08:45

soltysh requested changes Jan 25, 2022

View reviewed changes

miheer force-pushed the idle-issue-BZ-1737127 branch from 496aae9 to 2db69c3 Compare January 27, 2022 13:21

miheer force-pushed the idle-issue-BZ-1737127 branch from 2db69c3 to 0315dde Compare January 28, 2022 01:57

soltysh approved these changes Jan 28, 2022

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot assigned soltysh Jan 28, 2022

openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jan 28, 2022

openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jan 28, 2022

openshift-merge-robot merged commit 7c299f1 into openshift:master Jan 28, 2022

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Bug 1976894: Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned). #1026

Bug 1976894: Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned). #1026

miheer commented Jan 17, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 17, 2022

miheer commented Jan 17, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 17, 2022

Miciah Jan 18, 2022

Miciah Jan 18, 2022

miheer Jan 18, 2022

miheer Jan 18, 2022

Miciah Jan 18, 2022

miheer Jan 19, 2022

miheer Jan 19, 2022 •

edited

miheer Jan 19, 2022

Miciah Jan 22, 2022 •

edited

Miciah commented Jan 24, 2022

soltysh Jan 25, 2022

soltysh Jan 25, 2022

miheer commented Jan 28, 2022

miheer commented Jan 28, 2022

soltysh left a comment

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 28, 2022

Miciah commented Jan 29, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 29, 2022

		fmt.Println("Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.")
		return nil, nil

	fmt.Println("Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.")
	return nil, nil
	return nil, fmt.Errorf("idling StatefulSets is not supported")

	fmt.Println("Idling StatefulSet is not supported yet.")
	return nil, nil
	return nil, nil, fmt.Errorf("idling StatefulSets is not supported")

Bug 1976894: Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned). #1026

Bug 1976894: Idling a StatefulSet seems to work however accessing the Services Route does not wake up the application ("Application is not available" error page is returned). #1026

Conversation

miheer commented Jan 17, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 17, 2022

miheer commented Jan 17, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 17, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

miheer Jan 19, 2022 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Miciah Jan 22, 2022 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Miciah commented Jan 24, 2022

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

miheer commented Jan 28, 2022

miheer commented Jan 28, 2022

soltysh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 28, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 28, 2022

Miciah commented Jan 29, 2022

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 29, 2022

miheer Jan 19, 2022 •

edited

Miciah Jan 22, 2022 •

edited