Bug 1824426: tag primary OpenStack networks#3483
Bug 1824426: tag primary OpenStack networks#3483openshift-merge-robot merged 1 commit intoopenshift:masterfrom
Conversation
|
@Fedosin: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1824426, 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
DetailsIn 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
the
bugzilla/valid-bug
|
@Fedosin: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1824426, which is valid. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
DetailsIn 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. |
|
If we tag a custom network / aka IF machinesNetwork != nil |
|
/hold |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
|
@iamemilio done :) |
|
/hold cancel |
openshift-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/hold
Fedosin
changed the title
|
@Fedosin: An error was encountered adding this pull request to the external tracker bugs for bug 1824426 on the Bugzilla server at https://bugzilla.redhat.com:
DetailsIn 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. |
|
/hold cancel |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is "timed out" the only possible error here. If it is not it could make it difficult to debug. the user could be looking for a time out, when that is not the problem. 'err' sould have enough info in its message.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
no, there could also be a bug with multiple networks with the same tag... I separated them as you ask.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
add network tagg to the message . Useful for user to verify which tags should have been removed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
caps on "More..." Every other message starts with caps.
|
/test e2e-aws |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Just a general comment, untagRunner should be generic and not take the networkTag as an argument. Instead it should be the infra-id, and we derive the network-tag from it when calling untagNetwork from untagRunner.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why make it an error? That will cause the untagRunner to enter a loop to perform an action it can't do.
IMO, as opposed to deleting resources when we're not sure we were the ones creating them, it's OK to remove (internally used) tags from resources.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If we return an error, then untagRunner stops working immediately, no matter how many attempts there are left. So, for the runner it basically means - stop looping and return the error.
https://github.com/kubernetes/apimachinery/blob/release-1.17/pkg/util/wait/wait.go#L293
Despite the fact we consider the tag to be unique because it contains an infra ID, users can still add the tag to other networks. So removing them from all networks can lead to unpleasant side effects, which means we must stop the execution and do not try to repeat the untagging.
In the case of multiple added networks the tag <infraID>-primaryClusterNetwork should allow cluster-api-provider-openstack to define which IP address to set as the primary one for machines. Now CAPO can't do this, because Neutron returns the list of networks in alphabetical order.
|
/lgtm |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: iamemilio 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 |
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
4 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. |
|
/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. |
|
@Fedosin: Some pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: . The following pull requests linked via external trackers have not merged:
DetailsIn 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. |
|
/cherry-pick release-4.4 |
|
@adduarte: #3483 failed to apply on top of branch "release-4.4": DetailsIn 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. |
8 participants
In the case of multiple added networks the tag
<infraID>-primaryClusterNetworkshould allow cluster-api-provider-openstack to define which IP address to set as the primary one for machines.Now CAPO can't do this, because Neutron returns the list of networks in alphabetical order.