-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.7k
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
Invalid metadata in OpenStack instance #9086
Comments
/kind bug |
Really sad to see this... |
I am thinking could we have e2e OpenStack tests also, but we need someone to deliver access |
Someone could also manually run such tests before releases until such cluster would exist. |
I am sorry. Unfortunately it sneaked through. And it is in release 1.17 and 1.16. |
I think its worth following what cluster-api-provider-openstack did here: kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api-provider-openstack#484 They use a project called OpenLab to run their tests: theopenlab/openlab#141 And it looks like those tests are in the k8s testgrid: https://testgrid.k8s.io/sig-cluster-lifecycle-cluster-api-provider-openstack#capo-conformance-stable-k8s-master If we could setup something similar that would be great. I'm not familiar enough with the OpenStack side of things to take the next steps but I can provide assistance in getting the jobs themselves setup. |
we do actually have theopenlab/openlab#181 openstack project in some openstack installation. However, the problem is that the openstack version is pretty old in that one. We cannot really test loadbalancers etc there |
Hm do we have any tests setup there at all? I wonder if "something is better than nothing" at this point. If we can get any sort of periodic testing on there and connected to our test grid, it could at least serve as some basic smoke testing until they eventually upgrade their openstack version and add functionality. Would a test there have caught an issue like this? |
we do not have anything currently there. I am not sure how much the quota can handle there, maybe not much. So I do not know can that really be used for PR tests |
yea, perhaps not PR tests but a single job that runs periodically? we could make sure even the most basic smoke test is green before releasing new kops versions. It'd also help us trace issues back to specific PRs. |
Just a comment here for people that are running into this, but wants to try out 1.18.0-alpha for Openstack deployments until there is a new release with fix, the below steps worked for me (golang required ofc):
kops binary can then be found under
That binary works out OK for deploying clusters on OpenStack it seems. Just keep in mind that it's a build directly from master development branch. |
Even easier, the build including just this fix from the CI tests: |
Or that :D |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
I am trying 1.18.0 alpha 3 release and creating instances:
Bad request with: [POST https://exxx.13774/v2.1/servers], error message: {"badRequest": {"message": "Invalid input for field/attribute metadata. Value: {u'kopsGroupName': u'master-zone-3-1', u'k8s': u'clusterospr-0502de.k8s.local', u'KopsRole': u'Master', u'k8s.io/cluster-autoscaler/node-template/label/kops.k8s.io/instancegroup': u'master-zone-3-1', u'cluster_generation': u'0', u'k8s.io/role/master': u'1', u'ig_generation': u'0', u'kops.k8s.io/instancegroup': u'master-zone-3-1', u'KubernetesCluster': u'clusterospr-0502de.k8s.local', u'KopsInstanceGroup': u'master-zone-3-1', u'KopsNetwork': u'clusterospr-0502de.k8s.local'}. u'k8s.io/cluster-autoscaler/node-template/label/kops.k8s.io/instancegroup', u'k8s.io/role/master', u'kops.k8s.io/instancegroup' do not match any of the regexes: '^[a-zA-Z0-9-_:. ]{1,255}$'", "code": 400}}
cc @mitch000001 that PR that you made broke this..
and this is now backported to all releases
problem PRs
#8999
#9001
#9013
It is impossible to use any latest kops version with openstack
versions affected:
v1.18.0-alpha.3
v1.17.0-beta.2
v1.16.2
/kind bug
/priority critical-urgent
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: