NO-ISSUE: Fix ingress-proxy stale config deadlock in refresh-after-sn… - #244
Conversation
|
@sk-ilya: This pull request explicitly references no jira issue. 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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
Warning Review limit reached
More reviews will be available in 53 minutes and 56 seconds. Learn how PR review limits work. Your organization has run out of usage credits. Purchase more in the billing tab. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After more reviews become available, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans include higher PR review limits than trial, open-source, and free plans. In all cases, reviews become available again over time. During sustained high-volume PR review activity, CodeRabbit may temporarily slow when the next review becomes available. Please see our Fair Usage Limits Policy for further information. ℹ️ Review info⚙️ Run configurationConfiguration used: Repository: osac-project/coderabbit/.coderabbit.yaml Review profile: ASSERTIVE Plan: Enterprise Run ID: 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
WalkthroughThe PR adds a targeted ChangesFulfillment Ingress Proxy Restart
Estimated code review effort🎯 2 (Simple) | ⏱️ ~8 minutes Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Risk AssessmentThis change mitigates a race condition where stale ingress-proxy configuration could route traffic using outdated rules after snapshot restore. Security implications:
Caution Pre-merge checks failedPlease resolve all errors before merging. Addressing warnings is optional.
❌ Failed checks (1 error, 1 warning)
✅ Passed checks (9 passed)
✨ Finishing Touches🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
7e6d5d7 to
2f39a28
Compare
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🤖 Prompt for all review comments with AI agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
Inline comments:
In `@scripts/refresh-after-snapshot.sh`:
- Line 315: The oc rollout restart invocation for
deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy should follow the existing error-suppression
pattern used elsewhere: modify the command that references oc rollout restart
deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy -n "${INSTALLER_NAMESPACE}" to append
2>/dev/null || true so transient failures do not abort the script; locate the
command by the deploy name fulfillment-ingress-proxy and the INSTALLER_NAMESPACE
variable and apply the same redirection/|| true pattern used around other oc
rollout restart calls.
🪄 Autofix (Beta)
Fix all unresolved CodeRabbit comments on this PR:
- Push a commit to this branch (recommended)
- Create a new PR with the fixes
ℹ️ Review info
⚙️ Run configuration
Configuration used: Repository: osac-project/coderabbit/.coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: ASSERTIVE
Plan: Enterprise
Run ID: 13c0250f-5276-4c5b-9c72-10c8239a2c74
📒 Files selected for processing (1)
scripts/refresh-after-snapshot.sh
| # downstream services (console-proxy) that depend on routes defined in the new | ||
| # config can start successfully. This is safe to do before the rollout wait | ||
| # because ingress-proxy does not run database migrations. | ||
| oc rollout restart deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy -n "${INSTALLER_NAMESPACE}" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
🧹 Nitpick | 🔵 Trivial | 💤 Low value
Consider adding error handling for consistency and resilience.
Other oc rollout restart commands in this script use 2>/dev/null || true to suppress errors and continue gracefully (see lines 220, 333-334). While the deployment should exist at this point (discovered at lines 283-289), adding the same error handling pattern would improve consistency and resilience against transient API failures.
♻️ Proposed fix for error handling consistency
-oc rollout restart deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy -n "${INSTALLER_NAMESPACE}"
+oc rollout restart deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy -n "${INSTALLER_NAMESPACE}" 2>/dev/null || true📝 Committable suggestion
‼️ IMPORTANT
Carefully review the code before committing. Ensure that it accurately replaces the highlighted code, contains no missing lines, and has no issues with indentation. Thoroughly test & benchmark the code to ensure it meets the requirements.
| oc rollout restart deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy -n "${INSTALLER_NAMESPACE}" | |
| oc rollout restart deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy -n "${INSTALLER_NAMESPACE}" 2>/dev/null || true |
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
Verify each finding against current code. Fix only still-valid issues, skip the
rest with a brief reason, keep changes minimal, and validate.
In `@scripts/refresh-after-snapshot.sh` at line 315, The oc rollout restart
invocation for deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy should follow the existing
error-suppression pattern used elsewhere: modify the command that references oc
rollout restart deploy/fulfillment-ingress-proxy -n "${INSTALLER_NAMESPACE}" to
append 2>/dev/null || true so transient failures do not abort the script; locate
the command by the deploy name fulfillment-ingress-proxy and the
INSTALLER_NAMESPACE variable and apply the same redirection/|| true pattern used
around other oc rollout restart calls.
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: omer-vishlitzky, sk-ilya 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 |
3 participants
…apshot
Summary by CodeRabbit