Skip to content

Refactor BuildConfig controller to use Informers #14596

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

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jun 15, 2017

Conversation

csrwng
Copy link
Contributor

@csrwng csrwng commented Jun 12, 2017

Switches to using informers for the BuildConfig controller.
Switches to using caches for Build pruning.

Fixes #14049
Depends on #14289

@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 12, 2017

@openshift/devex ptal

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 12, 2017

@csrwng so this fixes #14049 ?

eventBroadcaster := record.NewBroadcaster()
eventBroadcaster.StartRecordingToSink(&v1core.EventSinkImpl{Interface: v1core.New(kubeExternalClient.Core().RESTClient()).Events("")})

buildClient := buildclient.NewOSClientBuildClient(openshiftClient)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

so this one is not using cached builds?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

it's not ... it's used for the patch and delete operations

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 12, 2017

i guess it doesn't fix all of #14049, just the buildconfig side. the build controller logic that calls it would still need to change, unless that's already covered by your changes to the build controller.

@bparees bparees self-assigned this Jun 12, 2017
@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 12, 2017

@csrwng so this fixes #14049 ?

yes

@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 12, 2017

i guess it doesn't fix all of #14049, just the buildconfig side. the build controller logic that calls it would still need to change, unless that's already covered by your changes to the build controller.

This PR includes changes to the build controller to use the informer for pruning

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 12, 2017

[testextended][extended:core(builds)]

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 12, 2017

lgtm if extended tests pass

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 12, 2017

[test]

@csrwng csrwng force-pushed the buildconfig_controller branch 6 times, most recently from 75250a7 to 3725d7c Compare June 12, 2017 21:25
@csrwng csrwng force-pushed the buildconfig_controller branch from 3725d7c to c6e150c Compare June 12, 2017 22:27
@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 13, 2017

#14229
[test]

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 13, 2017

the failed extended test is for build pruning so that looks suspicious given the changes in this pr.

@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 13, 2017

the failed extended test is for build pruning so that looks suspicious given the changes in this pr.

The test passes locally. Will look more closely at the logs from the test and see if there's some flake introduced by the use of the cache.

@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 13, 2017

@bparees so using the cache, it looks like the build that was just updated to completed is not updated in the cache yet when we list the builds for pruning. Would you be ok with reverting the use of the cache for the build lister?

@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 13, 2017

@bparees added commit to revert to using the rest client to list builds for pruning, ptal

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 13, 2017

lgtm

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 14, 2017

woo. squish+merge

@csrwng csrwng force-pushed the buildconfig_controller branch from 664395d to da9b120 Compare June 14, 2017 01:22
@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 14, 2017

[merge][severity:blocker]

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Evaluated for origin testextended up to da9b120

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jun 14, 2017

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/merge Waiting: You are in the build queue at position: 3

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Evaluated for origin merge up to da9b120

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-bot commented Jun 14, 2017

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/test Waiting: Determining build queue position

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/testextended FAILURE (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pull_request_origin_extended/623/) (Base Commit: 39a2785) (Extended Tests: core(builds))

@bparees
Copy link
Contributor

bparees commented Jun 14, 2017

acceptable extended test flake.

@jim-minter
Copy link
Contributor

@csrwng is there an issue or a comment on an issue somewhere, so that we can remember to come back to the pruning cache thing?

@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 14, 2017

@jim-minter we do now :) #14638
thx

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor

[test]

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

Evaluated for origin test up to da9b120

@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/test FAILURE (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pull_request_origin/2255/) (Base Commit: eb50c84)

@smarterclayton smarterclayton merged commit a0d7ce2 into openshift:master Jun 15, 2017
@csrwng
Copy link
Contributor Author

csrwng commented Jun 15, 2017

Flake #13980

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.

5 participants