✨ KCP: Extend rollout logic for in-place updates#12840
✨ KCP: Extend rollout logic for in-place updates#12840k8s-ci-robot merged 2 commits intokubernetes-sigs:mainfrom
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
size/XXL
sbueringer
added
the
area/provider/control-plane-kubeadm
|
No worries, this still contains #12817. This PR is much smaller :) (but still needs some polishing) |
|
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main |
sbueringer
force-pushed
the
pr-kcp-rollout-logic
branch
from
09f230e to
0f0f15e
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
added
size/L
sbueringer
force-pushed
the
pr-kcp-rollout-logic
branch
from
0f0f15e to
6cee4f8
Compare
|
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main |
Signed-off-by: Stefan Büringer buringerst@vmware.com
sbueringer
force-pushed
the
pr-kcp-rollout-logic
branch
from
6cee4f8 to
41b6683
Compare
sbueringer
changed the title
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
Ready for review /assign @fabriziopandini |
|
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main |
Signed-off-by: Stefan Büringer buringerst@vmware.com
k8s-ci-robot
added
size/XL
|
/test pull-cluster-api-e2e-main |
alexander-demicev
left a comment
alexander-demicev
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
thanks a lot, this is a solid start for introducing in-place update logic!
fabriziopandini
left a comment
fabriziopandini
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice work, only one question from my side
| // If a Machine is marked for deletion it is not eligible for in-place update. | ||
| if _, ok := machine.Annotations[clusterv1.DeleteMachineAnnotation]; ok { | ||
| res.EligibleForInPlaceUpdate = false | ||
| } | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wondering if we should expand use cases where a machine is not eligible for in-place:
- what if the machines has the manual remediation label? (it is another way to mark for deletion)
- what about if unhealthy in the MHC sense? (most likely it will be remediated before upgrading in place)
- what about if the machine has some control plane component unhealthy (TBD)
- what if the machine is already updating in place (as a safeguard to to trigger update in place twice)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if this func should be responsible for all of this. I think it would mean pulling in code from various parts of the code base (remediation, preflight checks, condition calculation, ...) into the UpToDate func
I added a note in the umbrella issue so we can come back to this comment in 2-3 PRs? (once we have a better understanding how the overall logic for in-place looks like).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
ACK, let's get back to this later
|
/lgtm /hold feel free to unhold |
k8s-ci-robot
added
do-not-merge/hold
|
LGTM label has been added. DetailsGit tree hash: 45e8b2a732bbe46ba1f5361de00134d60b846372 |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fabriziopandini 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 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
/hold cancel |
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/hold
4 participants
Signed-off-by: Stefan Büringer buringerst@vmware.com
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Part of #12291