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.

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

Ensure that SQLite state handles name-ID collisions #17917

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 27, 2023

Conversation

mheon
Copy link
Member

@mheon mheon commented Mar 24, 2023

If a container with an ID starting with "db1" exists, and a container named "db1" also exists, and they are different containers - if I run podman inspect db1 the container named "db1" should be inspected, and there should not be an error that multiple containers matched the name or id "db1". This was already handled by BoltDB, and now is properly managed by SQLite.

Fixes #17905

NONE

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added release-note-none approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. labels Mar 24, 2023
@mheon
Copy link
Member Author

mheon commented Mar 24, 2023

@vrothberg @edsantiago PTAL

Copy link
Member

@Luap99 Luap99 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Member

@vrothberg vrothberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM but let's also add a regression test for pods

test/e2e/create_test.go Show resolved Hide resolved
If a container with an ID starting with "db1" exists, and a
container named "db1" also exists, and they are different
containers - if I run `podman inspect db1` the container named
"db1" should be inspected, and there should not be an error that
multiple containers matched the name or id "db1". This was
already handled by BoltDB, and now is properly managed by SQLite.

Fixes containers#17905

Signed-off-by: Matt Heon <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

@vrothberg vrothberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 27, 2023
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 27, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mheon, vrothberg

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:

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 8bd9109 into containers:main Mar 27, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot added the locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. label Sep 4, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Sep 4, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. locked - please file new issue/PR Assist humans wanting to comment on an old issue or PR with locked comments. release-note-none
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

sqlite: podman container commit: container already exists
4 participants