Description of problem: The getLBHostedZone function lists multiple elb's for the name parameter. The current function iterates over every elb in a hosted zone instead of getting the elb hosted zone id by using the elb id. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 4.1.0-0.okd-2019-05-06-152942 How reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Deploy a cluster 2. Review the ingress operator logs for: aws/dns.go:200 Actual results: 2019-05-07T14:24:00.822-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "acb7b641d6e7011e9908e025cae9c705", "dns name": "acb7b641d6e7011e9908e025cae9c705-998075899.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.822-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "a0e98d1e56f9611e98b130a75a6a0a32", "dns name": "a0e98d1e56f9611e98b130a75a6a0a32-721882060.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.822-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "ab25768ed6fad11e98480023416072a9", "dns name": "ab25768ed6fad11e98480023416072a9-300553536.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.822-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "ab6b645636faf11e9815f0aa75be8304", "dns name": "ab6b645636faf11e9815f0aa75be8304-233397442.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.822-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "a943178ea6fd811e99333025ba57ad2f", "dns name": "a943178ea6fd811e99333025ba57ad2f-1814233026.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.823-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "a142d34c66fde11e9a0c50a82eea0a54", "dns name": "a142d34c66fde11e9a0c50a82eea0a54-1775174685.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.823-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "a07782f256ff611e98453029e242a4a9", "dns name": "a07782f256ff611e98453029e242a4a9-1420072097.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.823-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "a67f44ecb6ff711e9ac0706dca2417a5", "dns name": "a67f44ecb6ff711e9ac0706dca2417a5-1585805222.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.823-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "a58c7e485700711e9a4040a6f773a600", "dns name": "a58c7e485700711e9a4040a6f773a600-1352030917.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.823-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "aa0f70671700811e9b671065c757f45a", "dns name": "aa0f70671700811e9b671065c757f45a-927285957.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.823-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:200 found load balancer {"name": "a36418f39701911e99cdb069ff56b3fd", "dns name": "a36418f39701911e99cdb069ff56b3fd-191902666.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "hosted zone ID": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} 2019-05-07T14:24:00.823-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:215 associating load balancer with hosted zone {"dns name": "a36418f39701911e99cdb069ff56b3fd-191902666.us-west-2.elb.amazonaws.com", "zone": "Z1H1FL5HABSF5"} Expected results: A single hosted zone: 2019-05-07T15:08:58.367-0700 INFO operator.dns aws/dns.go:182 found hosted zone using tags {"zone id": "Z2R0MAXFHOY07X", "tags": {"Name":"dhansen-ctptd-int","kubernetes.io/cluster/dhansen-ctptd":"owned"}} Additional info:
Can you quantify the performance impact in terms of number of API calls over a reasonable timeframe (e.g. an hour) and the gains from a theoretical fix?
Fix submitted: https://github.com/openshift/cluster-ingress-operator/pull/232
This PR is still in Open state: https://github.com/openshift/cluster-ingress-operator/pull/232 Change the bug back to Modified.
https://github.com/openshift/cluster-ingress-operator/pull/232 details the need to stay with the implemented approach for listing lb's.