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

MaxUnavailable and powered off hosts comparison #1947

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 8, 2020

Conversation

mrajashree
Copy link
Contributor

  1. Compare maxUnavailable with powered off hosts before attempting to reconcile
    NotReady hosts When maxUnavailable of control plane is reached updates are made on the other control planes in the cluster rancher#25841
  2. Include powered off hosts as failed hosts for controlplane upgrade to return error Accept maxUnavailable for control plane nodes during upgrade  rancher#25599
  3. Change coredns upgrade strategy. With addons changes it was changed to have the k8s
    default value for a deployment of 25% maxUnavailable and maxSurge. This commit changes it
    back to maxUnavailable of 1 to avoid dns addon upgrade issues core-dns addon pod is stuck in pending state #1944

@deniseschannon deniseschannon requested review from superseb, cjellick and kinarashah and removed request for cjellick March 7, 2020 20:49
@mrajashree mrajashree changed the title MaxUnavailable and powered off hosts comparison WIP: MaxUnavailable and powered off hosts comparison Mar 7, 2020
1. Compare maxUnavailable with powered off hosts before attempting to reconcile
NotReady hosts
2. Include powered off hosts as failed hosts for controlplane upgrade to return error
3. Change coredns upgrade strategy. With addons changes it was changed to have the k8s
default value for a deployment of 25% maxUnavailable and maxSurge. This commit changes it
back to maxUnavailable of 1 to avoid dns addon upgrade issues
@mrajashree mrajashree changed the title WIP: MaxUnavailable and powered off hosts comparison MaxUnavailable and powered off hosts comparison Mar 7, 2020
Copy link
Contributor

@superseb superseb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants