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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

feat: implement graceful error handling in operator package #1683

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

feat: implement graceful error handling in operator package #1683

wants to merge 5 commits into from
+72 −36

Conversation

danxwang22
Copy link

Fixes #N/A

Description
This implements fail open logic within the operator package
How was this change tested?

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

@linux-foundation-easycla Linux Foundation: EasyCLA
Copy link

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Sep 17, 2024 •
edited
Loading

CLA Signed

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: danxwang22
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign jonathan-innis for approval. 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:

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 added the cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. label Sep 17, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @danxwang22!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/karpenter 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/karpenter has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @danxwang22. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs 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-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. labels Sep 17, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Sep 18, 2024
@coveralls
Copy link

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 10927409352

Warning: This coverage report may be inaccurate.

This pull request's base commit is no longer the HEAD commit of its target branch. This means it includes changes from outside the original pull request, including, potentially, unrelated coverage changes.

Details

  • 0 of 64 (0.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 1 file are covered.
  • 1 unchanged line in 1 file lost coverage.
  • Overall coverage decreased (-0.3%) to 80.497%
Changes Missing Coverage Covered Lines Changed/Added Lines %
pkg/operator/operator.go 0 64 0.0%
Files with Coverage Reduction New Missed Lines %
pkg/controllers/nodeclaim/lifecycle/liveness.go 1 81.82%
Totals Coverage Status
Change from base Build 10908916715: -0.3%
Covered Lines: 8420
Relevant Lines: 10460
💛 - Coveralls

jonathan-innis
jonathan-innis reviewed Sep 19, 2024
View reviewed changes
pkg/operator/operator.go
return []string{o.(*corev1.Pod).Spec.NodeName}
})
if err != nil {
log.FromContext(ctx).Error(err, "failed to setup pod indexer")
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The one question that I have from this: Is this going to cause weird failure states that we don't expect? Like, is it possible that we fail to setup the indexer due to some weird transient error and then we are in this weird half-state that we can't recover from?

We should probably look into the indexer code and see the scenarios where it can return an error. If it's just when the object isn't found, this is probably fine.

It might also be good to use other projects as reference-points here to see what they do on top of what sig-apimachinery recommends here.

pkg/apis/crds/karpenter.sh_nodepools.yaml
@@ -3,7 +3,7 @@ apiVersion: apiextensions.k8s.io/v1
kind: CustomResourceDefinition
metadata:
annotations:
controller-gen.kubebuilder.io/version: v0.16.2
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think these may be updated now so you may just need to rebase this PR based off of the current main

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jonathan-innis jonathan-innis jonathan-innis left review comments

@jackfrancis jackfrancis Awaiting requested review from jackfrancis

@tallaxes tallaxes Awaiting requested review from tallaxes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@danxwang22 @k8s-ci-robot @coveralls @jonathan-innis