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

cluster: fix tispark master scaling handling #924

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Nov 20, 2020

Conversation

AstroProfundis
Copy link
Contributor

What problem does this PR solve?

Make it possible for broken clusters to fix no tispark master error by scaling out a new tispark master node

What is changed and how it works?

Ignore topology validation error when listing clusters, this is a following up of #920

Check List

Tests

  • Manual test (add detailed scripts or steps below)

Code changes

  • Has exported function/method change

Related changes

  • Need to cherry-pick to the release branch

Release notes:

NONE

@AstroProfundis AstroProfundis added type/bug-fix Categorizes PR as a bug-fix cherrypick/1.2 labels Nov 20, 2020
@AstroProfundis AstroProfundis self-assigned this Nov 20, 2020
@AstroProfundis AstroProfundis changed the title cluster: ignore validation errors when listing clusters cluster: fix tispark master scaling handling Nov 20, 2020
@codecov-io
Copy link

codecov-io commented Nov 20, 2020

Codecov Report

Merging #924 (d6eaae0) into master (5116917) will increase coverage by 0.03%.
The diff coverage is 45.00%.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master     #924      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   53.11%   53.14%   +0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         260      260              
  Lines       18946    18956      +10     
==========================================
+ Hits        10063    10074      +11     
- Misses       7339     7340       +1     
+ Partials     1544     1542       -2     
Flag Coverage Δ
cluster 45.18% <45.00%> (+0.03%) ⬆️
dm 25.05% <10.00%> (+0.02%) ⬆️
integrate 47.74% <45.00%> (+0.03%) ⬆️
playground 22.09% <ø> (ø)
tiup 10.67% <0.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️
unittest 21.51% <10.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pkg/cluster/spec/spec_manager.go 62.31% <12.50%> (+0.55%) ⬆️
pkg/cluster/manager.go 67.75% <50.00%> (+0.12%) ⬆️
pkg/cluster/operation/scale_in.go 59.87% <70.00%> (+0.68%) ⬆️
pkg/cluster/api/pdapi.go 59.44% <0.00%> (-0.62%) ⬇️
pkg/cluster/api/dmapi.go 60.00% <0.00%> (+1.73%) ⬆️
pkg/utils/http_client.go 72.22% <0.00%> (+5.55%) ⬆️

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 5116917...d6eaae0. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Member

@lucklove lucklove left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@ti-srebot ti-srebot added the status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. label Nov 20, 2020
@lucklove lucklove added this to the v1.2.5 milestone Nov 20, 2020
@lucklove lucklove merged commit d1c4866 into pingcap:master Nov 20, 2020
@lucklove lucklove modified the milestones: v1.2.5, v1.2.6 Nov 30, 2020
@AstroProfundis AstroProfundis deleted the fix-909 branch January 19, 2021 03:36
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
status/LGT1 Indicates that a PR has LGTM 1. type/bug-fix Categorizes PR as a bug-fix
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants