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

Updating ose-haproxy-router-base images to be consistent with ART #424

Conversation

Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

@Miciah Miciah commented Oct 24, 2022

Reconciling with https://github.com/openshift/ocp-build-data/tree/b44f15ec9e84d1831eac81f8c757b3bed985dbeb/images/ose-haproxy-router-base.yml

This PR is based on #422 but additionally includes formatting changes to several files to appease gofmt. Including these changes is necessary in order for the verify job to pass.

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor Author

Miciah commented Oct 24, 2022

#422 was automatically labeled so it could merge without a bug or epic. This PR likewise shouldn't require a bug or epic.
/label docs-approved
/label px-approved
/label qe-approved

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added docs-approved Signifies that Docs has signed off on this PR px-approved Signifies that Product Support has signed off on this PR qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR labels Oct 24, 2022
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from candita and frobware October 24, 2022 13:30
@gcs278
Copy link
Contributor

gcs278 commented Oct 24, 2022

/lgtm
/approve

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 24, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Oct 24, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gcs278

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-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Oct 24, 2022
@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor Author

Miciah commented Oct 24, 2022

e2e-agnostic failed because [sig-network] network isolation when using a plugin in a mode that isolates namespaces by default should allow communication from non-default to default namespace on a different node [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel] failed. This test failed because a connection to the API failed:

{  fail [github.com/openshift/origin/test/extended/util/client.go:216]: Oct 24 15:04:41.395: Get "https://api.ci-op-qk4fdbpb-4c798.XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX:6443/apis/user.openshift.io/v1/users/~": dial tcp 146.148.44.143:6443: i/o timeout

I don't recall seeing failures like this recently, but it might be a flake.
/test e2e-agnostic

e2e-upgrade failed because [sig-arch][Feature:ClusterUpgrade] Cluster should remain functional during upgrade [Disruptive] [Serial] failed:

{  fail [github.com/openshift/origin/test/extended/util/disruption/disruption.go:197]: Oct 24 15:51:38.081: Unexpected alerts fired or pending during the upgrade:

alert TargetDown fired for 120 seconds with labels: {job="dns-default", namespace="openshift-dns", service="dns-default", severity="warning"}
alert TargetDown fired for 120 seconds with labels: {job="network-metrics-service", namespace="openshift-multus", service="network-metrics-service", severity="warning"}
alert TargetDown fired for 120 seconds with labels: {job="ovnkube-node", namespace="openshift-ovn-kubernetes", service="ovn-kubernetes-node", severity="warning"}
alert TargetDown fired for 150 seconds with labels: {job="node-exporter", namespace="openshift-monitoring", service="node-exporter", severity="warning"}

I don't recall seeing failures like this recently, but none of DNS, multus, nor OVN should rely on the router, so this is probably a flake.
/test e2e-upgrade

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor Author

Miciah commented Oct 24, 2022

e2e-upgrade failed because [sig-instrumentation] Prometheus [apigroup:image.openshift.io] when installed on the cluster shouldn't report any alerts in firing state apart from Watchdog and AlertmanagerReceiversNotConfigured [Early][apigroup:config.openshift.io] [Suite:openshift/conformance/parallel] failed:

{  fail [github.com/openshift/origin/test/extended/prometheus/prometheus.go:700]: Unexpected error:
    <errors.aggregate | len:1, cap:1>: [
        {
            Op: "Post",
            URL: "https://thanos-querier-openshift-monitoring.apps.ci-op-blwr2xr2-9c2de.ci.azure.devcluster.openshift.com/api/v1/query",
            Err: {
                Op: "dial",
                Net: "tcp",
                Source: nil,
                Addr: {
                    IP: [20, 120, 70, 196],
                    Port: 443,
                    Zone: "",
                },
                Err: {},
            },
        },
    ]
    Post "https://thanos-querier-openshift-monitoring.apps.ci-op-blwr2xr2-9c2de.ci.azure.devcluster.openshift.com/api/v1/query": dial tcp 20.120.70.196:443: i/o timeout
occurred

and also because the disruption tests failed:

{  ingress-to-oauth-server-new-connections was unreachable during disruption testing for at least 4m35s of 1h15m12s (maxAllowed=1m53s):

}
{  ingress-to-oauth-server-reused-connections was unreachable during disruption testing for at least 3m42s of 1h15m12s (maxAllowed=13s):

}
{  ingress-to-console-new-connections was unreachable during disruption testing for at least 4m34s of 1h15m12s (maxAllowed=1m58s):

}
{  ingress-to-console-reused-connections was unreachable during disruption testing for at least 3m58s of 1h15m12s (maxAllowed=33s):

}

E2E has been flaky, but those disruption numbers seem really high. I'm not sure what to expect from e2e-upgrade on Azure right now. Let's see what we get in a retest.
/test e2e-upgrade

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor Author

Miciah commented Oct 25, 2022

e2e-upgrade failed because [sig-arch][Feature:ClusterUpgrade] Cluster should remain functional during upgrade [Disruptive] [Serial] failed:

{Oct 25 01:05:27.810: disruption/service-load-balancer-with-pdb connection/new was unreachable during disruption:  for at least 16s of 1h9m27s (maxAllowed=12s):

This disruption test doesn't go through the router. This last job run doesn't show the disruption for the OAuth or console routes that the previous run showed.
/test e2e-upgrade

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Oct 25, 2022

@Miciah: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER]

This PR has been included in build ose-haproxy-router-base-container-v4.12.0-202305022015.p0.g3065f65.assembly.stream for distgit ose-haproxy-router-base.
All builds following this will include this PR.

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER]

This PR has been included in build openshift-enterprise-haproxy-router-container-v4.12.0-202305022015.p0.g3065f65.assembly.stream for distgit openshift-enterprise-haproxy-router.
All builds following this will include this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. docs-approved Signifies that Docs has signed off on this PR lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. px-approved Signifies that Product Support has signed off on this PR qe-approved Signifies that QE has signed off on this PR
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants