Ensure valid priority for control plane components #22217
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/M
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: derekwaynecarr 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
|
A number of BZs will be needed for this to pass. /assign @smarterclayton @ravisantoshgudimetla |
| continue | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| if pod.Spec.PriorityClassName != "system-cluster-critical" && pod.Spec.PriorityClassName != "system-node-critical" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Sometimes, we are noticing eventhough priorityClass is cluster-critical, priority value is not being assigned. This is similar kind of bug you noticed for static pods(kubernetes/kubernetes#74222). So, perhaps checking for priority value also is helpful here.
| var _ = Describe("[Feature:Platform][Smoke] Managed cluster should", func() { | ||
| f := e2e.NewDefaultFramework("operators") | ||
|
|
||
| It("should ensure control plane pods specify a priority", func() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Describe() and the It() both have a "should". You're going to end up with "Managed cluster should should ensure..."
|
@derekwaynecarr opened BZs to track for OLM, marketplace, and svc cat |
- Specify system-cluster-critical priority for operator - Blocks passing smoke tests for ensuring control plane pods always schedule See: openshift/origin#22217 Fixes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685331
|
/cc |
- Specify system-cluster-critical priority for operator - Blocks passing smoke tests for ensuring control plane pods always schedule See: openshift/origin#22217 Fixes https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1685331
|
/retest |
2 similar comments
|
/retest |
|
/retest |
|
/test e2e-aws |
1 similar comment
|
/test e2e-aws |
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
lifecycle/stale
|
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle rotten |
openshift-ci-robot
added
lifecycle/rotten
|
/remove-lifecycle rotten |
openshift-ci-robot
removed
the
lifecycle/rotten
|
@scolange ^^ |
derekwaynecarr
force-pushed
the
ensure-priority
branch
from
f8547b7
to
6a614ba
Compare
|
/retest |
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
lifecycle/stale
|
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle rotten |
openshift-ci-robot
added
lifecycle/rotten
|
Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity. Reopen the issue by commenting /close |
|
@openshift-bot: Closed this PR. 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. |
The test ensures that pods that run on the control plane have an appropriate priority.
Pods that run on each node should have "system-node-critical".
Pods that run on just the control plane should have "system-cluster-critical".
This is important when we co-locate workers with masters and we need to ensure scheduling.