Configure HealthCheck with `podman update` #24442

Honny1 · 2024-11-01T07:28:22Z

New flags in a podman update can change the configuration of HealthCheck when the container is started, without having to restart or recreate the container.

This can help determine why a given container suddenly started failing HealthCheck without interfering with the services it provides. For example, reconfigure HealthCheck to keep logs longer than the usual last X results, store logs to other destinations, etc.

These flags are added to the podman update command:

--health-cmd string: set a healthcheck command for the container ('none' disables the existing healthcheck)
--health-interval string: set an interval for the healthcheck (a value of disable results in no automatic timer setup)(Changing this setting resets timer.) (default "30s")
--health-log-destination string: set the destination of the HealthCheck log. Directory path, local or events_logger (local use container state file)(Warning: Changing this setting may cause the loss of previous logs.) (default "local")
--health-max-log-count uint: set maximum number of attempts in the HealthCheck log file. ('0' value means an infinite number of attempts in the log file) (default 5)
--health-max-log-size uint: set maximum length in characters of stored HealthCheck log. ('0' value means an infinite log length) (default 500)
--health-on-failure string: action to take once the container turns unhealthy (default "none")
--health-retries uint: the number of retries allowed before a healthcheck is considered to be unhealthy (default 3)
--health-start-period string: the initialization time needed for a container to bootstrap (default "0s")
--health-startup-cmd string: Set a startup healthcheck command for the container
--health-startup-interval string: Set an interval for the startup healthcheck. Changing this setting resets the timer, depending on the state of the container. (default "30s")
--health-startup-retries uint: Set the maximum number of retries before the startup healthcheck will restart the container
--health-startup-success uint: Set the number of consecutive successes before the startup healthcheck is marked as successful and the normal healthcheck begins (0 indicates any success will start the regular healthcheck)
--health-startup-timeout string: Set the maximum amount of time that the startup healthcheck may take before it is considered failed (default "30s")
--health-timeout string: the maximum time allowed to complete the healthcheck before an interval is considered failed (default "30s")
--no-healthcheck: Disable healthchecks on container

Fixes: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-60561

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Configure HealthCheck with podman update

packit-as-a-service · 2024-11-01T07:29:59Z

Ephemeral COPR build failed. @containers/packit-build please check.

Luap99

not really a full review just a quick look:

Can you remove all the flag description from the commit? I do not see how they add any value there. If I want to know what a flag does one should look at the docs or I can see that already in the diff here anyway.

Luap99 · 2024-11-01T17:16:26Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+	noHealthCheck := false
+	for k, v := range *changedHealthCheckConfig {
+		switch k {
+		case "NoHealthCheck":


all these strings seem to be used in many places so can you define them as constants somewhere, ie. libpod/define and then use the constants over the string duplication

Thanks, I have an idea of how to simplify it overall.

mheon · 2024-11-04T18:48:50Z

cmd/podman/common/create.go

@@ -665,6 +548,141 @@ func DefineCreateFlags(cmd *cobra.Command, cf *entities.ContainerCreateOptions,
 			`If a container with the same name exists, replace it`,
 		)
 	}
+	if mode == entities.CreateMode || mode == entities.UpdateMode {
+		// TODO: Focus on disable


What does this mean?

My note, I'll delete it.

mheon · 2024-11-04T18:49:41Z

cmd/podman/containers/update.go

@@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ import (
 )

 var (
-	updateDescription = `Updates the cgroup configuration of a given container`
+	updateDescription = `Updates the configuration of an already existing container, allowing different resource limits to be set, and HealthCheck configuration. The currently supported options are a subset of the podman create/run.`


"Updates the configuration of an existing container, allowing changes to resource limits and healthchecks"

mheon · 2024-11-04T19:14:47Z

libpod/container_internal.go

@@ -2738,3 +2741,327 @@ func (c *Container) update(resources *spec.LinuxResources, restartPolicy *string

 	return nil
 }
+
+func (c *Container) getCopyOfHealthCheckAndStartupHelathCheck() (*manifest.Schema2HealthConfig, *define.StartupHealthCheck) {
+	var healthCheck manifest.Schema2HealthConfig


This and startupHealthCheck should be pointers - will make returning nil a lot easier

mheon · 2024-11-04T19:15:20Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+func (c *Container) getCopyOfHealthCheckAndStartupHelathCheck() (*manifest.Schema2HealthConfig, *define.StartupHealthCheck) {
+	var healthCheck manifest.Schema2HealthConfig
+	if c.config.HealthCheckConfig != nil {
+		healthCheck = manifest.Schema2HealthConfig{


I think you can JSONDeepCopy this and save a lot of code

mheon · 2024-11-04T19:15:41Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+
+	var startupHealthCheck define.StartupHealthCheck
+	if c.config.StartupHealthCheckConfig != nil {
+		startupHealthCheck = define.StartupHealthCheck{


Same here, investigate JSONDeepCopy, I don't think this is performance critical at all.

mheon · 2024-11-04T19:16:36Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+	return &healthCheck, &startupHealthCheck
+}
+
+func (c *Container) changeHealthCheckConfiguration(changedHealthCheckConfig *entities.UpdateHealthCheckConfig) (bool, error) {


I don't like leaking entities into Libpod. Maybe move UpdateHealthCheckConfig into libpod and make the entities version just contain it?

Actually, no. We should probably move this parsing code out of Libpod. Instead we should accept a manifest.Schema2HealthConfig and define.StartupHealthCheck in Update in libpod, and do all the validation in the frontend.

mheon · 2024-11-04T19:19:56Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+	}
+
+	logrus.Debugf("HealthCheck updated for container %s", c.ID())
+	c.newContainerEvent(events.Update)


If you're calling this from Update() this is unnecessary, we only want one and it should be in Update itself

This comment here still seems to be open, we should not be creating two events

Honny1 · 2024-11-06T18:41:51Z

@mheon and @Luap99 I have edited the PR according to your comments.

mheon · 2024-11-06T20:35:49Z

libpod/container_api.go

@@ -136,6 +137,61 @@ func (c *Container) Update(resources *spec.LinuxResources, restartPolicy *string
 	return c.update(resources, restartPolicy, restartRetries)
 }

+// UpdateHealthCheckConfig updates HealthCheck configuration the given container.
+func (c *Container) UpdateHealthCheckConfig(healthCheckConfig *manifest.Schema2HealthConfig, changedTimer bool, noHealthCheck bool) error {


noHealthCheck can probably be healthCheckConfig == nil

And I think we might want to compute changedTimer in here, instead of requiring the user pass it in - moving the rest of the parsing out of libpod was good but this was maybe a step too far.

mheon · 2024-11-06T20:38:16Z

libpod/container_api.go

+
+// UpdateGlobalHealthCheckConfig updates global HealthCheck configuration the given container.
+// If value is nil then value will be not changed.
+func (c *Container) UpdateGlobalHealthCheckConfig(healthLogDestination *string, healthMaxLogCount *uint, healthMaxLogSize *uint, healthCheckOnFailureAction *define.HealthCheckOnFailureAction) error {


Maybe make a GlobalHealthCheckOptions struct that contains all of these? Arguments list is a little long

mheon · 2024-11-06T20:39:50Z

libpod/container_internal.go

@@ -2738,3 +2739,122 @@ func (c *Container) update(resources *spec.LinuxResources, restartPolicy *string

 	return nil
 }
+
+func (c *Container) resetHealthCheckTimers(noHealthCheck bool, changedTimer bool, isStartup bool) error {
+	if !c.ensureState(define.ContainerStateCreated, define.ContainerStateRunning) {


Maybe Paused as well? Do we stop the timers when we pause a container?

I haven't found any code that can stop the timer.

That's interesting. We should talk about this at standup on Monday. Not something we should solve in this PR but it does sound like a bug.

The timer runs even after the container is paused. Systemctl displays an error for a few seconds:

Nov 15 18:08:33 fedora podman[42]: error: container <id> is not running

I don't see how this is a big problem. We can discuss it on standup, but on Monday, I am going to midterm. I can create an Issue so we don't forget about it and then we can discuss it.

mheon · 2024-11-06T20:41:39Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+			c.state.HCUnitName); err != nil {
+			return err
+		}
+	case isStartup && changedTimer && c.config.StartupHealthCheckConfig != nil && !c.state.StartupHCPassed:


Hm. I think we hit this if we add a startup healthcheck to a running container that did not previously have a startup healthcheck. We probably don't want to do that, so we should set StartupHCPassed to true when adding a startup healthcheck to a running container that doesn't have one already

mheon · 2024-11-06T20:42:46Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+		return err
+	}
+
+	err := c.resetHealthCheckTimers(noHealthCheck, changedTimer, false)


This can be combined with the following line

mheon · 2024-11-06T20:45:45Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+	return nil
+}
+
+func (c *Container) updateStartupHealthCheckConfiguration(startupHealthCheckConfig *define.StartupHealthCheck, changedStartupTimer bool, noHealthCheck bool) error {


This is basically identical to updateHealthCheckConfiguration minus a few variables; can the two be refactored to share code? It seems like everything from line 2805 on is basically identical.

mheon · 2024-11-06T20:46:31Z

libpod/events/config.go

@@ -217,6 +217,8 @@ const (
 	Untag Status = "untag"
 	// Update indicates that a container's configuration has been modified.
 	Update Status = "update"
+	// Update indicates that a container's HealthCheck configuration has been modified.
+	UpdateHealthCheckConfig Status = "update-HealthCheck-config"


Probably unnecessary; we can just use Update

TomSweeneyRedHat · 2024-11-07T00:58:38Z

docs/source/markdown/podman-update.1.md.in

+
+@@option health-interval
+
+Changing this setting resets timer.


Suggested change

Changing this setting resets timer.

Changing this setting resets the timer.

TomSweeneyRedHat · 2024-11-07T01:01:34Z

libpod/define/healthchecks.go

+	// HealthMaxLogCount set maximum number of attempts in the HealthCheck log file.
+	// ('0' value means an infinite number of attempts in the log file)
+	HealthMaxLogCount *uint `json:"health_max_log_count,omitempty"`
+	// HealthOnFailure set action to take once the container turns unhealthy.


Suggested change

// HealthOnFailure set action to take once the container turns unhealthy.

// HealthOnFailure set the action to take once the container turns unhealthy.

TomSweeneyRedHat · 2024-11-07T01:05:34Z

A couple of small nits. Once @mheon 's concerns are addressed, LGTM

Luap99

@edsantiago Mind looking at the sys tests?

Luap99 · 2024-11-07T10:35:42Z

test/system/280-update.bats

+    if [[ $is_startup = "yes" ]]; then
+        run_podman run -d --name $ctrname    \
+            --health-cmd "echo $msg"         \
+            --health-startup-cmd "echo $msg" \
+            $IMAGE /home/podman/pause
+        cid="$output"
+    else
+        if [[ $no_hc = "yes" ]]; then
+            run_podman run -d --name $ctrname \
+                    $IMAGE /home/podman/pause
+            cid="$output"
+        else
+            run_podman run -d --name $ctrname \
+                --health-cmd "echo $msg"  \
+                $IMAGE /home/podman/pause
+            cid="$output"
+        fi
+    fi


there is a lot of duplication here, first you can use elif to avoid one layer of nesting

In general it is hard for the reader to figure out the differences, you should split out the run_podman call and only do the stuff that is different in there, i.e. define a hc_flags arrray where you add the flags too and then to the run_podman call below which would make this a lot simpler.

Second, what Paul said

Luap99 · 2024-11-07T10:41:28Z

test/system/280-update.bats

+    sleep 2s
+
+    run_podman update $ctrname --health-interval 1s
+
+    sleep 5s


Adding random sleeps is very bad you tests are adding over 20s of CI time doing nothing but sleeping, this is very wasteful.

Is there a way we can combine the test cases to avoid adding so much sleeps. And if we know one things sleeps means flakes so this is not very good. If there is no way to avoid it then at the very least all these testsshoul dbe run in parallel to not waste so much time

Luap99 · 2024-11-07T10:47:33Z

pkg/domain/entities/types/containers.go

-	Specgen  *specgen.SpecGenerator
+	NameOrID                        string
+	Specgen                         *specgen.SpecGenerator
+	ChangedHealthCheckConfiguration *define.UpdateHealthCheckConfig


I have no idea why we decided to send a full specgen when the server does not understand most of it but doesn't the specgen already contain all the healtchcheck settings? So it seems wasteful and confusing to send yet another type? Am I missing something?

I created another type where I can better distinguish what value has been set as new by the user using pointers. The entire LinuxResources type uses pointers or lists, but the HealthCheck type does not contain pointers, so I can't distinguish whether the user set the default values of the types or not.

The implementation of the podman update replaces LinuxResources from the specgen without caring about the previous configuration or whether the user set the value. This will cause the resource configuration to be overwritten by bad values.

Here is an example:

$ ./bin/podman run -dt --replace --name hc1 quay.io/libpod/alpine:latest top $ ./bin/podman inspect hc1 --format {{.HostConfig.PidsLimit}} 2048 $ ./bin/podman update hc1 --pids-limit 1024 $ ./bin/podman inspect hc1 --format {{.HostConfig.PidsLimit}} 1024 $ ./bin/podman update hc1 --cpus 2 # Change any other resource. $ ./bin/podman inspect hc1 --format {{.HostConfig.PidsLimit}} 0 <— this value should be 1024

I think this is a bug. I will create an issue. And I'll fix it in another PR.

Yes agree that is a bug, I guess using specgen there was a mistake then. The issue is we cannot just break this as they are exposed via API.

The Podman REST API has never used spacegen for updates.

edsantiago

DIE and DRY are critical concepts in software development. I encourage you to develop a mindset where you're looking for duplication and, each time you see it, or each time you find yourself copypasting, taking a step back to ask yourself how you can eliminate it.

Once you clean up all my suggestions below, I bet you might even find more, and I bet you can then find a way to make the test table-driven which is even better.

And then, of course, please add # bats test_tags=ci:parallel

test/system/280-update.bats

edsantiago · 2024-11-07T14:31:36Z

test/system/280-update.bats

+    if [[ $is_startup = "yes" ]]; then
+        run_podman run -d --name $ctrname    \
+            --health-cmd "echo $msg"         \
+            --health-startup-cmd "echo $msg" \
+            $IMAGE /home/podman/pause
+        cid="$output"
+    else
+        if [[ $no_hc = "yes" ]]; then
+            run_podman run -d --name $ctrname \
+                    $IMAGE /home/podman/pause
+            cid="$output"
+        else
+            run_podman run -d --name $ctrname \
+                --health-cmd "echo $msg"  \
+                $IMAGE /home/podman/pause
+            cid="$output"
+        fi
+    fi


Second, what Paul said

test/system/280-update.bats

edsantiago

So much better! Thank you! You are developing good practices. Still needs fixing though. A few recommendations inline, and one suggestion that I didn't take the time to implement.

Thanks again.

edsantiago · 2024-11-12T14:46:59Z

test/system/280-update.bats

+# HealthCheck configuration
+
+# bats test_tags=ci:parallel
+@test "podman update - test all HealtCheck flags" {


typo, HealthCheck

test/system/280-update.bats

edsantiago

Thank you for updating and rebasing and for your initiative in cleaning up more than I asked for.

Tests LGTM. One comment inline, not a blocker.

edsantiago · 2024-11-13T14:26:20Z

test/system/280-update.bats

+    run_podman healthcheck run $ctrname
+    is "$output" "" "output from 'podman healthcheck run'"
+
+    # Run podman update in two separate runs to make sure HealthCheck is overwritten correctly.


I don't understand this new action (splitting into two commands) nor its comment. I will assume it makes sense to everyone else, and won't block on it but will point it out in case others are puzzled by it too.

Because I found a bug. When you try to change any resource using podman update, it overwrites the current resource configuration. Here is an example:

$ ./bin/podman run -dt --replace --name hc1 quay.io/libpod/alpine:latest top $ ./bin/podman inspect hc1 --format {{.HostConfig.PidsLimit}} 2048 $ ./bin/podman update hc1 --pids-limit 1024 $ ./bin/podman inspect hc1 --format {{.HostConfig.PidsLimit}} 1024 $ ./bin/podman update hc1 --cpus 2 # Change any other resource. $ ./bin/podman inspect hc1 --format {{.HostConfig.PidsLimit}} 0 <— this value should be 1024

I want to make sure this is not happening for Healtcheck as well.

openshift-ci · 2024-11-13T14:27:24Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: edsantiago, Honny1

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:

~~OWNERS~~ [edsantiago]

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

Honny1 · 2024-11-13T14:46:47Z

@mheon @TomSweeneyRedHat @Luap99 I have updated the PR according to your comments.

Luap99

I need some more time to undersatnd this.

Luap99 · 2024-11-13T15:36:23Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+	}
+
+	logrus.Debugf("HealthCheck updated for container %s", c.ID())
+	c.newContainerEvent(events.Update)


This comment here still seems to be open, we should not be creating two events

Luap99 · 2024-11-13T15:38:36Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+	return nil
+}
+
+func (c *Container) updateHealthCheck(newHealthCheckConfig interface{}, currentHealthCheckConfig interface{}, setConfigFunc func(config interface{})) error {


why is this accepting interfaces, this makes API design super fragile and error prone. We should not be mixing so many types. reflection is difficult to understand and use correctly.

Luap99 · 2024-11-14T11:00:36Z

libpod/healthcheck.go

+	// NOTE: This is only safe while being called from "podman healthcheck run" which we know
+	// is the case here as we should not alter the exit code of another process that just
+	// happened to call this.
+	shutdown.SetExitCode(0)


Wait this is no longer true now, if you call this from outside podman healtchcheck run we have big problems espically for the system service as this overwrites the global exit code on signals.

Luap99 · 2024-11-14T11:06:16Z

libpod/container_internal.go

+		c.valid = false
+		err := WithHealthCheckLogDestination(*globalOptions.HealthLogDestination)(c)
+		if err != nil {
+			return err
+		}
+		c.valid = true


That is extremely ugly, setting a container to not valid like this is not sane if the pointer is shared acorrs several threads another container may see a invalid container and bail out. I don't think we that is a huge risk as we not really share these structs at the same time but still.

And calling CtrCreateOption function somehwere else is just not nice to read. Please just split out the validation bits into another function and then call it from here and WithHealthCheckLogDestination()

Luap99 · 2024-11-14T11:10:47Z

pkg/api/handlers/libpod/containers.go

 		utils.Error(w, http.StatusInternalServerError, fmt.Errorf("decode(): %w", err))
 		return
 	}
-	err = ctr.Update(options.Resources, restartPolicy, restartRetries)
+


can you just call (ic *ContainerEngine) ContainerUpdate() from like many other endpoints do to avoid duplication

Luap99 · 2024-11-14T11:13:11Z

pkg/domain/infra/abi/containers.go

+	healthCheckConfig, changedHealthCheck, err := specgenutil.GetNewHealthCheckConfig(container.HealthCheckConfig(), *updateOptions.ChangedHealthCheckConfiguration)
+	if err != nil {
+		return "", err
+	}
+	if changedHealthCheck {
+		if err := container.UpdateHealthCheckConfig(healthCheckConfig); err != nil {
+			return "", err
+		}
+	}
+
+	startupHealthCheckConfig, changedStartupHealthCheck, err := specgenutil.GetNewStartupHealthCheckConfig(container.Config().StartupHealthCheckConfig, *updateOptions.ChangedHealthCheckConfiguration)
+	if err != nil {
+		return "", err
+	}
+	if changedStartupHealthCheck {
+		if err := container.UpdateStartupHealthCheckConfig(startupHealthCheckConfig); err != nil {
+			return "", err
+		}
+	}
+
+	globalHealthCheckOptions, err := specgenutil.GetNewGlobalHealthCheck(*updateOptions.ChangedHealthCheckConfiguration)
+	if err != nil {
+		return "", err
+	}
+	if err := container.UpdateGlobalHealthCheckConfig(globalHealthCheckOptions); err != nil {
+		return "", err
+	}
+
+	if err = container.Update(updateOptions.Specgen.ResourceLimits, restartPolicy, updateOptions.Specgen.RestartRetries); err != nil {


this entire flow makes updates not atomic which seems bad. Every time you call into libpod we have to lock again. sync the state again and then do whatever we do save the db config and state again. Doing this multiple times is slow and not atomic which means ugly race conditions most likely.

I rather have this moved into one libpod function that acts under one lock.

Luap99 · 2024-11-14T11:15:36Z

pkg/specgenutil/specgen.go

+	return uint(valUint), nil
+}
+
+func GetChangedHealthCheckConfiguration(cmd *cobra.Command) define.UpdateHealthCheckConfig {


cobra imports should not be in specgen, cli parts should all stay under cmd/podman.
I See noe reason why the function is here.

Luap99 · 2024-11-14T11:16:07Z

pkg/specgenutil/specgen.go

+			case "health-max-log-size":
+				val, err := parseUint(valStr)
+				if err != nil {
+					logrus.Error(err)


all these errors must be handled and returned.

Luap99 · 2024-11-14T11:17:16Z

pkg/specgenutil/specgen.go

+
+func GetChangedHealthCheckConfiguration(cmd *cobra.Command) define.UpdateHealthCheckConfig {
+	updateHealthCheckConfig := define.UpdateHealthCheckConfig{}
+	cmd.Flags().Visit(func(f *pflag.Flag) {


I don't get why we loop here at all over all flags? Can't we just access all the flags directly if we have to list out all name anyway.

Visit visits only those flags that have been set.

you can use .Changed() on a flag to know if was set or not

New flags in a `podman update` can change the configuration of HealthCheck when the container is started, without having to restart or recreate the container. This can help determine why a given container suddenly started failing HealthCheck without interfering with the services it provides. For example, reconfigure HealthCheck to keep logs longer than the usual last X results, store logs to other destinations, etc. Fixes: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/RHEL-60561 Signed-off-by: Jan Rodák <[email protected]>

Honny1 · 2024-11-15T17:42:22Z

/packit rebuild-failed

openshift-ci bot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Enforce release-note requirement, even if just None labels Nov 1, 2024

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 1, 2024

github-actions bot added the kind/api-change Change to remote API; merits scrutiny label Nov 1, 2024

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch from 2f18a35 to 475e16f Compare November 1, 2024 07:35

openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 1, 2024

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch from 475e16f to e052162 Compare November 1, 2024 15:20

openshift-ci bot added release-note and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Enforce release-note requirement, even if just None labels Nov 1, 2024

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch from e052162 to 432b6d3 Compare November 1, 2024 15:52

Luap99 reviewed Nov 1, 2024

View reviewed changes

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch 2 times, most recently from 621c46c to 96def55 Compare November 1, 2024 19:25

mheon reviewed Nov 4, 2024

View reviewed changes

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch 3 times, most recently from 74eae00 to 4471330 Compare November 6, 2024 16:46

Honny1 marked this pull request as ready for review November 6, 2024 18:39

openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 6, 2024

mheon reviewed Nov 6, 2024

View reviewed changes

TomSweeneyRedHat reviewed Nov 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

Luap99 reviewed Nov 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

edsantiago requested changes Nov 7, 2024

View reviewed changes

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch from 4471330 to dfb98ce Compare November 12, 2024 13:16

edsantiago requested changes Nov 12, 2024

View reviewed changes

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch 2 times, most recently from a762e8f to 6019246 Compare November 13, 2024 14:21

edsantiago approved these changes Nov 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 13, 2024

Luap99 reviewed Nov 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

Luap99 requested changes Nov 14, 2024

View reviewed changes

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch 4 times, most recently from 772a856 to 9145618 Compare November 15, 2024 16:55

Honny1 force-pushed the change-healthcheck-config-via-podman-update branch from 9145618 to 7ec1665 Compare November 15, 2024 17:00

	Changing this setting resets timer.
	Changing this setting resets the timer.

	// HealthOnFailure set action to take once the container turns unhealthy.
	// HealthOnFailure set the action to take once the container turns unhealthy.

Configure HealthCheck with podman update #24442

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Configure HealthCheck with podman update #24442

Conversation

Honny1 commented Nov 1, 2024 • edited Loading

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

packit-as-a-service bot commented Nov 1, 2024

Luap99 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Honny1 commented Nov 6, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TomSweeneyRedHat Nov 7, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

TomSweeneyRedHat commented Nov 7, 2024

Luap99 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Honny1 Nov 13, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

edsantiago left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

edsantiago left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

edsantiago left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 13, 2024

Honny1 commented Nov 13, 2024

Luap99 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Honny1 commented Nov 15, 2024

Configure HealthCheck with `podman update` #24442

Configure HealthCheck with `podman update` #24442

Honny1 commented Nov 1, 2024 •

edited

Loading

TomSweeneyRedHat Nov 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Honny1 Nov 13, 2024 •

edited

Loading