Update trouble shooting to include the issue of etcd upgrade

[chendave]

For the isse which is reported recently: kubernetes/kubeadm#2957 We'd better to provide some tips to workaround this known issue.

related: kubernetes/kubeadm#2957

[netlify]

👷 Deploy Preview for kubernetes-io-vnext-staging processing.

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	31d5a38
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-io-vnext-staging/deploys/6552df04200c7900088990c2

[chendave]

/cc @neolit123 @SataQiu @pacoxu

[neolit123]

chendave wants to merge 1 commit into kubernetes:dev-1.29

i don't know if 1.29 is the right branch for this. the bug is in 1.28.1, .2.
let's wait for feedback from k/website maintainers.

/hold

[neolit123]

/sig cluster-lifecycle

[chendave]

@neolit123 thanks for the detail review and all those comments! all were fixed up!

[neolit123]

/assign @tengqm

PTAL for guidance and approval.

#43903 (comment)

we have a bug in 3 PATCH versions of 1.28 that we want to add a troubleshooting entry for.
later 1.28 versions fix the problem.

should this PR be against dev-1.28, or main?

@chendave note that changing the base branch from the github UI will not work, probably.
you have to store the diff locally somehow, create a new local branch (based on the correct branch - e.g. main) and then you can force push to your chendave:dev-1.29-2.

[sftim]

Thanks

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from tengqm. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• content/en/OWNERS

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

[chendave]

@sftim @tengqm pls tell if this is the right branch to base against, it's currently on top of 1.29-dev branch, #43903 (comment).

thanks!

[neolit123]

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 5c2565c35ddf0160a2bcc3555c55f029e41a0e13

[tengqm]

I'd suggest we put these contents into content/en/docs/tasks/administer-cluster/kubeadm/kubeadm-upgrade.md and retarget the PR to the main branch which is about 1.28.x versions.

[neolit123]

I'd suggest we put these contents into content/en/docs/tasks/administer-cluster/kubeadm/kubeadm-upgrade.md and retarget the PR to the main branch which is about 1.28.x versions.

SGTM, but we don't want this info to appear in the 1.29 upgrade page.
do we have to clean it after the 1.29 docs are out?

[neolit123]

/hold cancel
PTAL again for approval, @tengqm @sftim
thanks

this is still an open Q, but we can clean it up later
#43903 (comment)

[sftim]

should this PR be against dev-1.28, or main?

We're not using dev-1.28 any more as v1.28 is released. This PR should target main.

[chendave]

@sftim here it is: #44058, pls take a look, thanks!

[neolit123]

@sftim here it is: #44058, pls take a look, thanks!

why a separate PR?
should we close this one, then?

[neolit123]

@sftim here it is: #44058, pls take a look, thanks!

why a separate PR? should we close this one, then?

/close
added LGTM to the other one

[k8s-ci-robot]

@neolit123: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

@sftim here it is: #44058, pls take a look, thanks!

why a separate PR? should we close this one, then?

/close
added LGTM to the other one

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.