-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.3k
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
🌱 Ensure provider deployments are available on init #3825
🌱 Ensure provider deployments are available on init #3825
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
@@ -74,9 +82,50 @@ func (i *providerInstaller) Install() ([]repository.Components, error) { | |||
|
|||
ret = append(ret, components) | |||
} | |||
|
|||
// Verify that Deployments in any components to be installed is available |
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'm checking the deployments status serially instead of in parallel because as I was testing with the parallel version (using WaitGroup and an errChan), it took longer because of the exponential backoff for some of the go routines.
I opted to keep it serially because:
- it took less time on my machine
- the log output from clusterctl was cleaner
- the code looks cleaner as well
I can explain in more detail if y'all would like. 🙂
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.
Serially probably makes sense, they're coming up in parallel but we're looking to block until all have completed, so there's no time saving in checking them in parallel
- message: Deployment has minimum availability. | ||
reason: MinimumReplicasAvailable | ||
status: "True" | ||
type: Available |
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.
Yup. I know this looks weird but it will be a whole lot cleaner if the Init tests were also written with envtest.
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.
Other than this lgtm!
f0b635d
to
a35017e
Compare
@wfernandes, background question: should we wait for the operator given that the entire install sequence will be impacted? |
@fabriziopandini Yeah that does make sense. I can close this PR and the corresponding issue #3720 with a note saying that the operator will take care of it. |
Closing per comment above /close |
@vincepri: Closed this PR. In 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. |
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR adds a check to ensure the
Deployment
s areAvailable
as part ofclusterctl init
operation.Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #3720