Gh49 distributed dns plan #79
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
mikenairn
changed the title
maleck13
reviewed
Apr 15, 2024
| if len(row.current) > 0 && len(row.candidates) == 0 { | ||
| changes.Delete = append(changes.Delete, row.current...) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
took me a while to get this in my head. Might be worth a bit more of a comment? So basically I see this controller removing itself as an owner of this endpoint and if no other owners deleting otherwise updating the record
mikenairn
force-pushed
the
GH49_multi_cluster_plan
branch
3 times, most recently
from
33908bc to
0add671
Compare
maleck13
reviewed
Apr 16, 2024
mikenairn
force-pushed
the
GH49_multi_cluster_plan
branch
4 times, most recently
from
1c80038 to
244f858
Compare
Initial work to modify the external-dns plan to work in the proposed way for distubuted dns. Updates the plan to treat all endpoints passed to it (current/desired) as part of a single shared set of records. The calculation logic now takes into account other endpoints added to the plan when calculating the desired changes for any other endpoint also added. The plan calculation logic is broken into two steps: 1. Calculate what endpoints will be created/updated and deleted based on the current and desired records passed to the plan. For each endpoint that will still exist if these changes were to be applied(create/update), a map of dnsNames and their owners is calculated. 2. Create the external-dns Changes for the endpoints calculated in step one. For all endpoints calculated to be an update the target values are re-calculated using the information gathered in step one about ownership of dnsNames. If we detect that a CNAME has a "managed" target value (it's in our owner map) we use the information known about who owns it to manipulate the desired targets values.
Prevent the switch of CNAME records to Alias A records for CNAMES with an aws ec2 loadbalancer as the target. Prevent evaluate target health automatically being applied to alias targets (Not strictly required since we don't create any now but turning it off anyway)
mikenairn
force-pushed
the
GH49_multi_cluster_plan
branch
from
244f858 to
0dd544b
Compare
Update the plan to keep track of conflicts it can't resolve. It stores each conflict as an error in an array that can be queried later before applying changes. The plan will currently create a conflict error if the record type of an endpoint is going to change, or an attempt to update a record that is owned or unowned by one that is unowned or owned (The opposite).
maleck13
reviewed
Apr 20, 2024
| @@ -365,6 +366,10 @@ func (r *DNSRecordReconciler) applyChanges(ctx context.Context, dnsRecord *v1alp | |||
|
|
|||
| plan = plan.Calculate() | |||
|
|
|||
| if err = plan.ConflictError(); err != nil { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nice so conflicts in this pr now also
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, when i was writing the issue for it (#85), i was looking into the best way to do it and pretty much just did it, so carried on. Kept it fairly simple anyway, just collect errors and expose them from the plan to query later.
Was thinking this morning i might make it more generic so we can just add all types of possible errors to it. We can use it for the missing managed record errors we want for the likes of default geo etc..
maleck13
reviewed
Apr 20, 2024
| @@ -159,4 +165,75 @@ var _ = Describe("DNSRecordReconciler", func() { | |||
| }, TestTimeoutLong, time.Second).Should(Succeed()) | |||
| }) | |||
|
|
|||
| It("should not allow second record to change the type", func() { | |||
maleck13
approved these changes
Apr 20, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
closes #49 #85
Initial work to modify the external-dns plan to work in the proposed way for distubuted dns.
Updates the plan to treat all endpoints passed to it (current/desired) as part of a single shared set of records. The calculation logic now takes into account other endpoints added to the plan when calculating the desired changes for any other endpoint also added.
The plan calculation logic is broken into two steps:
Calculate what endpoints will be created/updated and deleted based on the current and desired records passed to the plan. For each endpoint that will still exist if these changes were to be applied(create/update), a map of dnsNames and their owners is calculated.
Create the external-dns Changes for the endpoints calculated in step one. For all endpoints calculated to be an update the target values are re-calculated using the information gathered in step one about ownership of dnsNames. If we detect that a CNAME has a "managed" target value (it's in our owner map) we use the information known about who owns it to manipulate the desired targets values.