Skip to content

Upsert opts #109

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 23, 2019
Merged

Upsert opts #109

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 23, 2019

Conversation

gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor

as before, the first 2 commits are other PRs we are trying to merge separately, but touch the same files

/assign @bparees

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. label Feb 15, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gabemontero

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Feb 15, 2019
@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

actually I might redo this one .... the perf commit has some elements of the bug fix still ...

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

ok NOW the perf commit has the right set of deltas

@bparees ptal as time permits (of course next week make sense if necessary)

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 16, 2019
@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

rebase for recent merges pushed

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

I've got some template related optimizations in mind as well wrt skipped processing like what is here for imagestreams @bparees .... holding off until we've at least officially starting iterating over what was done so far

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aws-operator

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

actually I have IMO some more improvements to the config changed detection in general as well ...

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 18, 2019
@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

ok, unskipped optimization for both streams and templates pushed
also massaged the confg chg detection some ... I think I simplified it

@bparees ptal

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

gabemontero commented Feb 19, 2019 •
edited
Loading

Ignore the concurrence comment I just deleted ... I found another spot where I was not checking the existence of a stream in the in progress reason field correctly

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

ok @bparees I've pushed

  • fixes to imagestream watch event cache processing that incorrectly left in progress == true until the next resync interval (it was this vs. missed watches that were occurring re: my scrum status this AM)
  • additional info around why and imagestream was still in progress
  • now always print an indication of any imagestream watch event coming in while we are in progress == true

ptal

bparees
bparees reviewed Feb 19, 2019
View reviewed changes
@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

updates pushed @bparees ... also pushed one minor tweak from me

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@gabemontero gabemontero mentioned this pull request Feb 20, 2019
Merged
@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

bump @bparees

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Feb 21, 2019

@gabemontero squash+lgtm but let's make sure the TBR change merges first, as that's the critical one.

/hold

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Feb 21, 2019
@gabemontero
perf improvement for unskipped streams and templates
eb92e34 
simplify config chg detection algorithm
reset cache timeout back to 5 min (better for missed watch events post startup)
bypass template upserts on registry only change
ignore imagestream unskips on registry change
various fixes around imagestream event caching (leaving stale Reason/in progress info)
always log imagestream watch event when in progress == true
also along with api server stability
Fixes openshift#100
@gabemontero gabemontero added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 21, 2019
@gabemontero gabemontero mentioned this pull request Feb 22, 2019
Closed
@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aws

1 similar comment
@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

/test e2e-aws

@gabemontero
Copy link
Contributor Author

ooh ... passing jobs .... can we unhold/merge this one @bparees since api.ci creds aren't coming today?

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Feb 23, 2019 via email

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. labels Feb 23, 2019
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit d28c3df into openshift:master Feb 23, 2019
@gabemontero gabemontero deleted the upsert-opts branch February 23, 2019 03:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@bparees bparees bparees left review comments

@legionus legionus Awaiting requested review from legionus

@dmage dmage Awaiting requested review from dmage

Assignees

@bparees bparees

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@gabemontero @openshift-ci-robot @bparees @openshift-merge-robot