Bug 1378604 - GlusterFS endpoints disappear without a Service in the project
Summary: GlusterFS endpoints disappear without a Service in the project
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: OpenShift Container Platform
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Storage
Version: 3.2.1
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
low
Target Milestone: ---
: ---
Assignee: Bradley Childs
QA Contact: Jianwei Hou
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-09-22 21:21 UTC by Eric Jones
Modified: 2020-03-11 15:15 UTC (History)
4 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-02-01 16:04:46 UTC
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Eric Jones 2016-09-22 21:21:13 UTC
Description of problem:
After the upgrade from 3.2.1.4 to 3.2.1.13 for a Red Hat customer, any project with a glusterfs endpoint that did not have a corresponding glusterfs service, the endpoint would disappear.  This link describes the issue well: https://github.com/openshift/origin/pull/6167

Customer indicates that they did not see this issue in 3.2.1.4


Additional info:
Frequently if the service doesn't exist. Creating a service in each project persists the endpoint, which is not ideal since end-users could accidentally delete the service.

Comment 1 Jan Safranek 2016-10-07 14:19:11 UTC
I noticed this OpenShift commit between  3.2.1.4 and 3.2.1.13: https://github.com/openshift/ose/commit/1fc581b329820ea74cde33eac9094cfe91fc332e

Andy, could it lead to missing endpoints in this case?

Comment 2 Eric Paris 2016-10-07 14:23:14 UTC
Isn't this 'working as designed' and one needs to make a headless service to stop the garbage collector?

Comment 3 Andy Goldstein 2016-10-07 14:25:00 UTC
I don't see how. It only modifies endpoints under the "kubernetes" service in the "default" namespace.

Comment 4 Jan Safranek 2016-10-07 14:25:40 UTC
(In reply to Eric Paris from comment #2)
> Isn't this 'working as designed' and one needs to make a headless service to
> stop the garbage collector?

"Customer indicates that they did not see this issue in 3.2.1.4"

I'd expect they will have hard time in 3.3 and 3.4, however we should not break it in a minor release.

Comment 5 Jan Safranek 2017-02-01 16:04:46 UTC
We were unable to reproduce this behavior in 3.2 and we believe that anything related to garbage collection of Endpoints has been fixed in 3.3.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.