Skip to content
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

KCP: validate version changes are no further than one minor version #2578

Closed
sethp-nr opened this issue Mar 6, 2020 · 9 comments · Fixed by #3508
Closed

KCP: validate version changes are no further than one minor version #2578

sethp-nr opened this issue Mar 6, 2020 · 9 comments · Fixed by #3508
Labels
area/control-plane Issues or PRs related to control-plane lifecycle management help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lifecycle/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release.
Milestone

Comments

@sethp-nr
Copy link
Contributor

sethp-nr commented Mar 6, 2020

User Story

As an operator, I would like to get immediate feedback when I try to ask the KCP to perform a multi-version upgrade.

Detailed Description

Pulling this out of #2489: if a KCP is pointing to version 1.16.x, it should reject updates that ask to upgrade the control plane directly to 1.18.x.

Anything else you would like to add:

I'm not sure what the semantics should be around downgrades – do we deny those outright?

/kind feature

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Mar 6, 2020
@detiber
Copy link
Member

detiber commented Mar 6, 2020

I'm not sure what the semantics should be around downgrades – do we deny those outright?

I think blocking downgrades outright is the safe bet. That said, we probably need to look into providing a rollback path for partially completed upgrades.

@vincepri
Copy link
Member

vincepri commented Mar 6, 2020

/milestone v0.3.x

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v0.3.x milestone Mar 6, 2020
@vincepri vincepri added area/clusterctl Issues or PRs related to clusterctl area/control-plane Issues or PRs related to control-plane lifecycle management and removed area/clusterctl Issues or PRs related to clusterctl labels Mar 23, 2020
@nwoodmsft
Copy link

I was also trying a similar scenario (1.16->1.18) without realizing that it is not supported to skip a minor version in the current upgrade flow. Any plans to support skipping minor versions or is this intentional and something that is likely to remain for the foreseeable future?

Also, Is there a section of the book or similar where I can read about CAPI requirements such as this? It would be great for new comers to have this documented along with any other gotchas (e.g. I also just learned that k8s 1.16 is a min requirement for v1alpha3).

@detiber
Copy link
Member

detiber commented Apr 29, 2020

I was also trying a similar scenario (1.16->1.18) without realizing that it is not supported to skip a minor version in the current upgrade flow. Any plans to support skipping minor versions or is this intentional and something that is likely to remain for the foreseeable future?

It's likely to remain for as long as it's a limitation of Kubernetes/kubeadm.

@fejta-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jul 28, 2020
@detiber
Copy link
Member

detiber commented Jul 28, 2020

/lifecycle frozen

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lifecycle/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels Jul 28, 2020
@vincepri
Copy link
Member

/milestone v0.3.9
/priority important-soon
/help

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@vincepri:
This request has been marked as needing help from a contributor.

Please ensure the request meets the requirements listed here.

If this request no longer meets these requirements, the label can be removed
by commenting with the /remove-help command.

In response to this:

/milestone v0.3.9
/priority important-soon
/help

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot modified the milestones: v0.3.x, v0.3.9 Jul 31, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. labels Jul 31, 2020
@vincepri vincepri removed the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Jul 31, 2020
@vincepri
Copy link
Member

/kind bug

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label Jul 31, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/control-plane Issues or PRs related to control-plane lifecycle management help wanted Denotes an issue that needs help from a contributor. Must meet "help wanted" guidelines. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lifecycle/frozen Indicates that an issue or PR should not be auto-closed due to staleness. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants