-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.1k
Revert "ci-operator/config/openshift/cluster-version-operator: Temporarily drop abort-at from master" #20875
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
Revert "ci-operator/config/openshift/cluster-version-operator: Temporarily drop abort-at from master" #20875
Conversation
…arily drop abort-at from master"
|
@wking: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1972948, which is invalid:
Comment DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
Issues in openshift/release go stale after 30d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
|
Stale issue in openshift/release rot after 15d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle rotten |
|
Rotten issues in openshift/release close after 15d of inactivity. Reopen the issue by commenting /close |
|
@openshift-bot: Closed this PR. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
@wking: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1972948. The bug has been updated to no longer refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
/reopen |
|
@wking: Reopened this PR. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
@wking: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1972948, which is invalid:
Comment DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
LalatenduMohanty
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: LalatenduMohanty, wking The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
Looks like thing might have moved ahead and we might not see the same issue which caused us to do #19396 . If we see same issues again then we will drop the test again. |
|
/hold cancel Alert issue is still open, but doesn't seem to be coming up in rehearsals. So we're going to start trying A->B->A presubmits again, and if we see alerts we'll complain in the bug ;) |
|
@wking: No Bugzilla bug is referenced in the title of this pull request. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
/test build03-dry |
|
@wking: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
@wking: Updated the
DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
…and B->A jobs We've been using abort-at since way back in 05da8a4 (ci-operator: CVO should perform a rollback test, 2020-01-20, openshift#6780), because it's important to cover both: * Can the proposed CVO successfully roll out the cluster on update? (where we want the new CVO in the target release). * Can the proposed CVO successfully validate an update request and launch the requested replacement CVO? (where we want the new CVO in the source release). However, being different has costs, because not all cluster components are tuned to gracefully handle back-to-back updates, and we have had to make temporary changes like b0b6533 (ci-operator/config/openshift/cluster-version-operator: Temporarily drop abort-at from master, 2021-06-17, openshift#19396), before putting our toes back in the water with ad76b3e (Revert "ci-operator/config/openshift/cluster-version-operator: Temporarily drop abort-at from master", 2021-08-03, openshift#20875). While discovering chained-update UX issues is useful, CVO presubmits are probably not the best place to do it (it would be better to have a periodic, so you have coverage even when the CVO is not seeing pull request activity). And a more fundamental issue is that recent origin suites use job classification to look up historical disruption levels to limit regression risk [1]. Those lookups are based on inspections of the cluster-under-test [2], and not on the job configuration. And the classification structure only has Release and FromRelease strings [3]. So today, when the suite checks for disruption at the end of an A->B->A abort-at=100 run, it sets {FromRelease: B, Release: A}, and complains when the disruption from the full A->B->A transition overshoots the allowed disruption for a single B->A leg. We could hypothetically address this by plumbing knowledge of the job configuration through the origin suite, so we could compare with expected disruption from other A->B->A runs. But David's not interested in making that sort of change in origin until we can demonstrate it mattering in a periodic that some team has committed to monitor and maintain, and we don't have that today. Another issue with A->B->A tests is that sometimes we make changes to the CVO that are one way, like extending the enumerated list of ClusterVersion capabilities [4]. On the B->A leg, the CVO restores the original ClusterVersion CRD with a restricted capability enum, and subsequent attempts to update the ClusterVersion resource fail like: I0818 17:41:40.580147 1 cvo.go:544] Error handling openshift-cluster-version/version: ClusterVersion.config.openshift.io "version" is invalid: [status.capabilities.enabledCapabilities[0]: Unsupported value: "Console": supported values: "openshift-samples", "baremetal", "marketplace", status.capabilities.enabledCapabilities[1]: Unsupported value: "Insights": supported values: "openshift-samples", "baremetal", "marketplace", status.capabilities.enabledCapabilities[2]: Unsupported value: "Storage": supported values: "openshift-samples", "baremetal", "marketplace"] By separating into two presubmits, we should have consistently passing A->B updates, with the rest of the organization helping to keep that job style healthy. And we'll also have B->A updates which look the same to the job classifier, and should be similarly healthy as long as we don't make breaking CVO changes. When we do make breaking CVO changes, we can inspect the results, and: /override e2e-agnostic-upgrade-out-of-change when we feel that the proposed CVO cleanly launched the target, and ignore everything that happened once the target CVO started trying to reconcile the cluster. [1]: https://github.com/openshift/origin/blob/c33bf438a00bbd66227186f01c7e6a5c36741492/test/extended/util/disruption/backend_sampler_tester.go#L91-L98 [2]: https://github.com/openshift/origin/blob/c33bf438a00bbd66227186f01c7e6a5c36741492/pkg/synthetictests/platformidentification/types.go#L43-L117 [3]: https://github.com/openshift/origin/blob/c33bf438a00bbd66227186f01c7e6a5c36741492/pkg/synthetictests/platformidentification/types.go#L16-L23 [4]: openshift/cluster-version-operator#801
…and B->A jobs (#31518) We've been using abort-at since way back in 05da8a4 (ci-operator: CVO should perform a rollback test, 2020-01-20, #6780), because it's important to cover both: * Can the proposed CVO successfully roll out the cluster on update? (where we want the new CVO in the target release). * Can the proposed CVO successfully validate an update request and launch the requested replacement CVO? (where we want the new CVO in the source release). However, being different has costs, because not all cluster components are tuned to gracefully handle back-to-back updates, and we have had to make temporary changes like b0b6533 (ci-operator/config/openshift/cluster-version-operator: Temporarily drop abort-at from master, 2021-06-17, #19396), before putting our toes back in the water with ad76b3e (Revert "ci-operator/config/openshift/cluster-version-operator: Temporarily drop abort-at from master", 2021-08-03, #20875). While discovering chained-update UX issues is useful, CVO presubmits are probably not the best place to do it (it would be better to have a periodic, so you have coverage even when the CVO is not seeing pull request activity). And a more fundamental issue is that recent origin suites use job classification to look up historical disruption levels to limit regression risk [1]. Those lookups are based on inspections of the cluster-under-test [2], and not on the job configuration. And the classification structure only has Release and FromRelease strings [3]. So today, when the suite checks for disruption at the end of an A->B->A abort-at=100 run, it sets {FromRelease: B, Release: A}, and complains when the disruption from the full A->B->A transition overshoots the allowed disruption for a single B->A leg. We could hypothetically address this by plumbing knowledge of the job configuration through the origin suite, so we could compare with expected disruption from other A->B->A runs. But David's not interested in making that sort of change in origin until we can demonstrate it mattering in a periodic that some team has committed to monitor and maintain, and we don't have that today. Another issue with A->B->A tests is that sometimes we make changes to the CVO that are one way, like extending the enumerated list of ClusterVersion capabilities [4]. On the B->A leg, the CVO restores the original ClusterVersion CRD with a restricted capability enum, and subsequent attempts to update the ClusterVersion resource fail like: I0818 17:41:40.580147 1 cvo.go:544] Error handling openshift-cluster-version/version: ClusterVersion.config.openshift.io "version" is invalid: [status.capabilities.enabledCapabilities[0]: Unsupported value: "Console": supported values: "openshift-samples", "baremetal", "marketplace", status.capabilities.enabledCapabilities[1]: Unsupported value: "Insights": supported values: "openshift-samples", "baremetal", "marketplace", status.capabilities.enabledCapabilities[2]: Unsupported value: "Storage": supported values: "openshift-samples", "baremetal", "marketplace"] By separating into two presubmits, we should have consistently passing A->B updates, with the rest of the organization helping to keep that job style healthy. And we'll also have B->A updates which look the same to the job classifier, and should be similarly healthy as long as we don't make breaking CVO changes. When we do make breaking CVO changes, we can inspect the results, and: /override e2e-agnostic-upgrade-out-of-change when we feel that the proposed CVO cleanly launched the target, and ignore everything that happened once the target CVO started trying to reconcile the cluster. [1]: https://github.com/openshift/origin/blob/c33bf438a00bbd66227186f01c7e6a5c36741492/test/extended/util/disruption/backend_sampler_tester.go#L91-L98 [2]: https://github.com/openshift/origin/blob/c33bf438a00bbd66227186f01c7e6a5c36741492/pkg/synthetictests/platformidentification/types.go#L43-L117 [3]: https://github.com/openshift/origin/blob/c33bf438a00bbd66227186f01c7e6a5c36741492/pkg/synthetictests/platformidentification/types.go#L16-L23 [4]: openshift/cluster-version-operator#801
Reverts #19396.
/hold
We don't want to land this until the alert is adjusted to avoid false-positives on these chained updates.