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

Move some release-blocking/informing jobs to k8s-infra-prow-builds #17488

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 2, 2020

Conversation

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. area/config Issues or PRs related to code in /config area/jobs area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider sig/cli Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG CLI. sig/cloud-provider Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cloud Provider. sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels May 2, 2020
@spiffxp
Copy link
Member Author

spiffxp commented May 2, 2020

/hold
(I see some typos)

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 2, 2020
@spiffxp
Copy link
Member Author

spiffxp commented May 2, 2020

/hold cancel

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label May 2, 2020
@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

/lgtm
/approve
FYI: @kubernetes/ci-signal @kubernetes/release-engineering

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 2, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: justaugustus, spiffxp

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 02f5611 into kubernetes:master May 2, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.19 milestone May 2, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@spiffxp: Updated the job-config configmap in namespace default at cluster default using the following files:

  • key sig-cli-config.yaml using file config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-cli/sig-cli-config.yaml
  • key gce-conformance.yaml using file config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-cloud-provider/gcp/gce-conformance.yaml
  • key gcp-gce.yaml using file config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-cloud-provider/gcp/gcp-gce.yaml
  • key node-kubelet.yaml using file config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-node/node-kubelet.yaml
  • key integration.yaml using file config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-testing/integration.yaml
  • key verify.yaml using file config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-testing/verify.yaml

In response to this:

None of these expect greenhouse, use a non-gce-project pool, or are currently failing

release-blocking-master:

release-informing-master:

/cc @BenTheElder @dims @justaugustus
I'd like to let these soak over the weekend, and will revert if anything looks amiss

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.

@spiffxp spiffxp deleted the migrate-more-e2e-jobs branch May 2, 2020 02:05
@spiffxp
Copy link
Member Author

spiffxp commented May 4, 2020

Following up to review failures since 2020-05-01 7:20pm PT

This looks like boskos not having any clean projects? I would have assumed 20 projects to be enough for all 10 of these jobs to run concurrently...

failed to prepare test environment: --provider=gce boskos failed to acquire project: resources not found

e.g.

Seems like there was an outage at roughly the same time for:

Since the new cluster isn't heavily loaded right now, there's much less resource contention; some test cases benefit more than others, but the overall time looks flatter/lower for:

Outside of the boskos/capacity issue, I think everything looks good.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/config Issues or PRs related to code in /config area/jobs area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. sig/cli Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG CLI. sig/cloud-provider Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cloud Provider. sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants