Fix minscale on deploy#7214
Conversation
knative-prow-robot
added
the
size/L
knative-prow-robot
left a comment
knative-prow-robot
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@tanzeeb: 0 warnings.
Details
In response to this:
Fixes #6935
Same root cause as #6733, but for brand new routes which do not have a
status.trafficyet.Proposed Changes
- Add route labels to all revisions and configurations listen in both the
.spec.trafficand.status.trafficof a Route.Release Note
Fixes bug with new minScale revisions, where containers are created, then destroyed, then created again.
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.
|
/assign @mattmoor @vagababov |
knative-prow-robot
added
area/API
markusthoemmes
left a comment
markusthoemmes
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good on the surface but I'm by no means an expert in the layering of these controllers. Others will be better suited.
This looks like it was a pain to dig down into though, so thanks for doing that @tanzeeb
vagababov
left a comment
vagababov
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Looks good to me.
But yea, I'll let Matt approve :)
|
FYI - just tested it and it did fix my issue ! :-) |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: mattmoor, tanzeeb The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
knative-prow-robot
added
approved
tanzeeb
force-pushed
the
fix-minscale-on-deploy
branch
from
6187886 to
df128b4
Compare
knative-prow-robot
removed
lgtm
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
|
ugh need ☕️ |
|
The following jobs failed:
Automatically retrying due to test flakiness... |
|
@mattmoor Shall we backport this into 0.13? |
* Test minscale stability when configuration is created * Check both .spec.traffic and .status.traffic for resources to label * Inline condition * Inline owner reference check
* Add route label to `LatestCreatedRevision` (#7110) * Test minScale during update to configuration * Add route label to LatestCreatedRevision * Use impl.Enqueue instead of tracker.OnChanged in labeler reconciler * Update minscale readiness e2e test * faster polling (250 ms) * more descriptive error for ensureDesiredScale * inlined latestCreatedRevisionName check * Enqueue route instead of config in labeler reconciler * Only label configurations of RunLatest traffic targets * Label configuration if it or it's revision is in a route * Only pull config for runLatest in labeler * Some cleanups in the e2e test (#7193) * Some cleanups in the e2e test * Some cleanups in the e2e test * fix nit * Simplify minscale test. (#7235) The only error returned from the function is when we fail to actually verify the scale. So return boolean instead. * Fix minscale on deploy (#7214) * Test minscale stability when configuration is created * Check both .spec.traffic and .status.traffic for resources to label * Inline condition * Inline owner reference check Co-authored-by: Tanzeeb Khalili <tkhalili@pivotal.io> Co-authored-by: Victor Agababov <vagababov@gmail.com>
9 participants
Fixes #6935
Same root cause as #6733, but for brand new routes which do not have a
status.trafficyet.Proposed Changes
.spec.trafficand.status.trafficof a Route.Release Note