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

Remove example with parallel tasks with a fan-in task #2546

Conversation

jlpettersson
Copy link
Member

Changes

The example with two parallel tasks using PVC based workspaces and a third fan-in task,
may be problematic in some environments. If the cluster is regional but the PVCs are
zonal the third task may never be able to mount both PVCs (it should have used a regional
PVC storageClass instead).

Since this depends so much of the environment e.g. type of cluster and capabilities of the
storage, I propose we remove this example. The intent was to document access modes and that
is possible without the example.

Related to #2540
and #2521

Submitter Checklist

These are the criteria that every PR should meet, please check them off as you
review them:

See the contribution guide for more details.

Double check this list of stuff that's easy to miss:

Reviewer Notes

If API changes are included, additive changes must be approved by at least two OWNERS and backwards incompatible changes must be approved by more than 50% of the OWNERS, and they must first be added in a backwards compatible way.

/kind documentation

The example with two parallel tasks using PVC based workspaces and a third fan-in task,
may be problematic in some environments. If the cluster is _regional_ but the PVCs are
_zonal_ the third task may never be able to mount both PVCs (it should have used a regional
PVC storageClass instead).

Since this depends so much of the environment e.g. type of cluster and capabilities of the
storage, I propose we remove this example. The intent was to document _access modes_ and that
is possible without the example.
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. label May 5, 2020
@tekton-robot tekton-robot requested review from afrittoli and dlorenc May 5, 2020 13:13
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label May 5, 2020
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @jlpettersson. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a tektoncd member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label May 5, 2020
@vdemeester
Copy link
Member

@jlpettersson there is a no-ci folder that shouldn't run on the CI. This allow us to add those example still, just not executed on the CI (yet 😛 )

/ok-to-test

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels May 5, 2020
@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sbwsg

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

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 5, 2020
@vdemeester
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 5, 2020
@bobcatfish
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for figuring this out @jlpettersson !!! In the long run, I think it would be good to re-introduce this example - we might be able to make this work by using a storage class that allows the PVC to be used in multiple zones

@tekton-robot tekton-robot merged commit a7fb389 into tektoncd:master May 5, 2020
jlpettersson added a commit to jlpettersson/community that referenced this pull request May 19, 2020
Jonas has recently become a regularly contributor. He started with adding a minor [_missing_ `omitempty`](tektoncd/pipeline#2301) and then [proposed some ideas](tektoncd/pipeline#1986 (comment)) around workspaces and PersistentVolumeClaim creation and continued to [elaborate around those ideas](tektoncd/pipeline#1986 (comment)). A sunny day a few days later, he also submitted an [extensive implementation for volumeClaimTemplate](tektoncd/pipeline#2326), corresponding to the idea discussions.

A few days later submitted a [small refactoring PR](tektoncd/pipeline#2392), and he also listened to community members that [proposed changes](tektoncd/pipeline#2450) to his implementation about volumeClaimTemplates and did an [implementation for that proposal](tektoncd/pipeline#2453).

A rainy day, he also wrote [technical documentation about PVCs](tektoncd/pipeline#2521) including adding an example that caused _flaky_ integration tests for the whole community during multiple days. When he understood his mistake, he submitted a [removal of the example](tektoncd/pipeline#2546) that caused flaky tests.

He has also put his toe into Tekton Catalog and [contributed to the buildah task](tektoncd/pipeline#2546).

This has followed, mostly with more PRs to the Pipeline project:

- tektoncd/pipeline#2460
- tektoncd/pipeline#2491
- tektoncd/pipeline#2502
- tektoncd/pipeline#2506
- tektoncd/pipeline#2632
- tektoncd/pipeline#2633
- tektoncd/pipeline#2634
- tektoncd/pipeline#2636
- tektoncd/pipeline#2601
- tektoncd/pipeline#2630

Jonas is excited about the great community around Tekton and the project! He now would like to join the org.
tekton-robot pushed a commit to tektoncd/community that referenced this pull request May 20, 2020
Jonas has recently become a regularly contributor. He started with adding a minor [_missing_ `omitempty`](tektoncd/pipeline#2301) and then [proposed some ideas](tektoncd/pipeline#1986 (comment)) around workspaces and PersistentVolumeClaim creation and continued to [elaborate around those ideas](tektoncd/pipeline#1986 (comment)). A sunny day a few days later, he also submitted an [extensive implementation for volumeClaimTemplate](tektoncd/pipeline#2326), corresponding to the idea discussions.

A few days later submitted a [small refactoring PR](tektoncd/pipeline#2392), and he also listened to community members that [proposed changes](tektoncd/pipeline#2450) to his implementation about volumeClaimTemplates and did an [implementation for that proposal](tektoncd/pipeline#2453).

A rainy day, he also wrote [technical documentation about PVCs](tektoncd/pipeline#2521) including adding an example that caused _flaky_ integration tests for the whole community during multiple days. When he understood his mistake, he submitted a [removal of the example](tektoncd/pipeline#2546) that caused flaky tests.

He has also put his toe into Tekton Catalog and [contributed to the buildah task](tektoncd/pipeline#2546).

This has followed, mostly with more PRs to the Pipeline project:

- tektoncd/pipeline#2460
- tektoncd/pipeline#2491
- tektoncd/pipeline#2502
- tektoncd/pipeline#2506
- tektoncd/pipeline#2632
- tektoncd/pipeline#2633
- tektoncd/pipeline#2634
- tektoncd/pipeline#2636
- tektoncd/pipeline#2601
- tektoncd/pipeline#2630

Jonas is excited about the great community around Tekton and the project! He now would like to join the org.
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. kind/documentation Categorizes issue or PR as related to documentation. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants