-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 817
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
Move RollingUpdateOnReady to stable #2271
Merged
roberthbailey
merged 4 commits into
googleforgames:main
from
Jeffwan:move_feature_stable
Oct 4, 2021
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
4 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This test is failing:
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I will rerun it locally and check the problem
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@roberthbailey I can reproduce the test failures in my env. Seems change in controller.go is straightforward. I didn't make other changes. Not sure why this test failed. Do you have any clues?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Given that these tests were aimed at when the feature was off
assert.NoError(t, utilruntime.ParseFeatures(string(utilruntime.FeatureRollingUpdateOnReady)+"=false"))
, it's expected they would fail now it's enabled always.So they would either need to be updated to the correct values, or removed entirely.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I took a quick look at these tests and it isn't immediately obvious to me what we are checking for. What test coverage are we losing if we delete the entire set of tests? Or just delete the 3 that are failing?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This tests various gameserver set and rolling update deployment scenarios, and if they go beyond max surge, remove items as appropriate, etc.
Basically does
rollingUpdateDeployment
do as it should.I think it's worth converting this over before moving to stable - also to ensure an extra layer that it is doing as expected.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That makes sense to me. @Jeffwan - we have about 1 more day to try and get this in before the 1.18 release, otherwise we can ship it with 1.19.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
em. Seem it's better to change to the appropriate values rather than removing them? Let me check algorithm today and see if I can make the changes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I figure out the problem. I manually change to use
c.rollingUpdateRestBeforeFixOnReady()
they all pass. They do work for caseutilruntime.FeatureRollingUpdateOnReady=false
.agones/pkg/fleets/controller.go
Lines 605 to 610 in aefac73
Since we already use
rollingUpdateRestFixedOnReady
and removec.rollingUpdateRestBeforeFixOnReady
, these test need changes.I go though the logic and change right number in test cases "test smalled numbers of active and allocated" and "attempt to drive replicas over the max surge"
I remove "statuses don't match the spec. nothing should happen", this is because update won' be called in the past
c.rollingUpdateRestBeforeFixOnReady
. However, this test case is not valid anymore becausec.rollingUpdateRestFixedOnReady
does consider active GSS.@roberthbailey @markmandel Please have another check.