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

Conditionals: Configure what happens when a task is skipped due to condition failure #1023

Closed
dibyom opened this issue Jun 26, 2019 · 24 comments
Assignees
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed.

Comments

@dibyom
Copy link
Member

dibyom commented Jun 26, 2019

Expected Behavior

Users can decide to either run or skip tasks that are dependent on the task that was skipped due to a condition check failure.

Actual Behavior

Tasks that are dependent on a skipped task are always skipped

Steps to Reproduce the Problem

  1. Create a pipeline like similar to this:
apiVersion: tekton.dev/v1alpha1
kind: Pipeline
metadata:
  name: two-tasks-one-condition
spec:
  tasks:
  - name: conditional-task
    taskRef:
      name: task1
    conditions:
      - conditionRef: always-fail
  - name: run-if-1-or-1-skipped
    taskRef:
      name: task2
    runAfter:
      - conditional-task
  1. Run the pipeline through a PipelineRun
  2. task2 is not executed

Additional Info

  1. Might be worth enumerating the use cases for this feature before implementing this.
  2. Based on discussion from Design: Conditional execution #27: https://docs.google.com/a/google.com/document/d/1iTb0rDDlgQcPbiYIGJ-atkaML8aCyPCyhfucCPJmNLs/edit?disco=AAAADD1TnxU
@dibyom
Copy link
Member Author

dibyom commented Jul 30, 2019

ref: #1137

@bobcatfish
Copy link
Collaborator

One thought after looking at #1137 :

  • If a Task is getting a resource from a Task that has a failing condition, I'm not sure it makes any sense to run that dependent Task: e.g. if a Task is building an image as an output, and another task wants to get the built image (digest) from that Task, it wouldn't make sense to run it anyway
  • runAfter is fuzzier - if it's just a matter of ordering, it feels like the user could potentially choose whether the tasks "after" should be skipped or not

@dibyom
Copy link
Member Author

dibyom commented Sep 3, 2019

From @afrittoli in #1264:

In the example pipeline I used runAfter but I believe the behaviour would be the same if the dependency was introduced using from on a resource.

@afrittoli
Copy link
Member

If a Task is getting a resource from a Task that has a failing condition, I'm not sure it makes any sense to run that dependent Task: e.g. if a Task is building an image as an output, and another task wants to get the built image (digest) from that Task, it wouldn't make sense to run it anyway

I'm not sure we have a good solution for this case specifically. I've been trying to build a pipeline that builds a docker image only if needed - which I encoded in a condition. The build task has the condition attached and the next Task deploys a cloud function that uses that image plus some code on top.
As long as I don't rely on the image digest, and I use a tag e.g. "latest", the second task can run
even if the first one did not.

@vdemeester
Copy link
Member

/kind feature

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Dec 9, 2019
@dibyom
Copy link
Member Author

dibyom commented Jan 29, 2020

The proposal in #1684 has a solution to this using the runOn syntax. So, if a task's condition failed its state is "skip":

# 1. change execution graph i.e. onSuccess do something onFailure do something else: 
- name: task1
  conditions:
    conditionRef: "condition-that-sometime-fails"
  taskRef: { name: "my-task" }

- name: runIfTask1Fails 
  runAfter: task1
  runOn: ["failure"]

- name: runIfTask1Succeeds
  runAfter: task1
  runOn: ["success"]

- name: runIfTask1IsSkipped
  runAfter: task1
  runOn: ["skip"]

@afrittoli
Copy link
Member

#2094 (comment)

@afrittoli
Copy link
Member

What happens though in this use case? Is runIfTask2IsSkipped executed when task1 is skipped because its condition fails?

- name: task1
  conditions:
    conditionRef: "condition-that-sometime-fails"
  taskRef: { name: "my-task" }

- name: runIfTask1IsSkipped
  runAfter: task1
  runOn: ["skip"]

- name: task2
  runAfter: task1
  conditions:
    conditionRef: "condition-that-sometime-fails"
  taskRef: { name: "my-task2" }

- name: runIfTask2IsSkipped
  runAfter: task2
  runOn: ["skip"]

What I want to say is that a runOn: ["skip"] would cover more cases than an else logic, so we still would need a way to specify that we only want the else in some cases.

@vdemeester vdemeester moved this from Needs triage to Backlog in Tekton Pipelines Mar 16, 2020
@afrittoli afrittoli removed this from the Pipelines Post-beta 🐱 milestone May 4, 2020
hatmarch added a commit to rhappdev-demo/fraud_detection that referenced this issue Aug 7, 2020
Adds support for a condition that will look for a secret.  This is integrated with the pipeline to skip the scan-image step if sysdig secret isn't there, unfortunately optional steps are not supported yet in Tekton so the whole rest of the pipeline will fail if there is no secret per here: tektoncd/pipeline#1023
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.
Reopen the issue with /reopen.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.

/close

Send feedback to tektoncd/plumbing.

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. and removed lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. labels Aug 14, 2020
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

@tekton-robot: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.
Reopen the issue with /reopen.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.

/close

Send feedback to tektoncd/plumbing.

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.

Tekton Pipelines automation moved this from Unsure what to do next to Closed Aug 14, 2020
@bobcatfish
Copy link
Collaborator

/reopen
/remove-lifecycle rotten

/assign jerop

@jerop is actually taking care of this via https://github.com/tektoncd/community/blob/master/teps/0007-conditions-beta.md#skipping-1

@tekton-robot tekton-robot reopened this Aug 17, 2020
Tekton Pipelines automation moved this from Closed to Needs triage Aug 17, 2020
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

@bobcatfish: Reopened this issue.

In response to this:

/reopen
/remove-lifecycle rotten

/assign jerop

@jerop is actually taking care of this via https://github.com/tektoncd/community/blob/master/teps/0007-conditions-beta.md#skipping-1

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.

@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.
If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

/lifecycle rotten

Send feedback to tektoncd/plumbing.

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Sep 16, 2020
@jerop
Copy link
Member

jerop commented Sep 17, 2020

open pr: #3176

/remove-lifecycle rotten

@tekton-robot tekton-robot removed the lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. label Sep 17, 2020
@Bl4d3s
Copy link

Bl4d3s commented Oct 21, 2020

@jerop I really could use the feature you implemented in the PR. is there any ETA when this will be merged?
If I can help with anything to speed things up, I can always take a look.

My use case:

  1. Unit and Integration-Tests are executed
  2. Optional additional tasks if systemtests or similar need to be executed (guarded with when expression)
  3. Task collecting all test results from workspace (has to be after 2. obviously, but is not dependent on it)

@jerop
Copy link
Member

jerop commented Oct 21, 2020

@Bl4d3s we paused that work for a bit as we discussed some design choices and alternatives in #3345 -- rebasing the pr now and planning to get it in before the v0.18 release (revisited syntax in tektoncd/community#258)

@Bl4d3s
Copy link

Bl4d3s commented Nov 20, 2020

@Bl4d3s we paused that work for a bit as we discussed some design choices and alternatives in #3345 -- rebasing the pr now and planning to get it in before the v0.18 release

I see the PR is already approved, but needs a rebase. Any hope to get it in with the next release?

@jerop
Copy link
Member

jerop commented Nov 20, 2020

I see the PR is already approved, but needs a rebase. Any hope to get it in with the next release?

@Bl4d3s we revisited the skipping syntax in this TEP to clarify that the skipping option is related to WhenExpressions -- thank you for your patience as we work to get it right and get it in soon

@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale with a justification.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.
If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close with a justification.
If this issue should be exempted, mark the issue as frozen with /lifecycle frozen with a justification.

/lifecycle stale

Send feedback to tektoncd/plumbing.

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Feb 18, 2021
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten with a justification.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.
If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close with a justification.
If this issue should be exempted, mark the issue as frozen with /lifecycle frozen with a justification.

/lifecycle rotten

Send feedback to tektoncd/plumbing.

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Mar 20, 2021
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.
Reopen the issue with /reopen with a justification.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten with a justification.
If this issue should be exempted, mark the issue as frozen with /lifecycle frozen with a justification.

/close

Send feedback to tektoncd/plumbing.

Tekton Pipelines automation moved this from Needs triage to Closed May 7, 2021
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

@tekton-robot: Closing this issue.

In response to this:

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.
Reopen the issue with /reopen with a justification.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten with a justification.
If this issue should be exempted, mark the issue as frozen with /lifecycle frozen with a justification.

/close

Send feedback to tektoncd/plumbing.

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
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed.
Projects
No open projects
Tekton Pipelines
  
Closed
Development

No branches or pull requests

7 participants