Bug 1827051 - [4.4] Operators may not respond to spec changes in managed deployments or daemonsets [NEEDINFO]
Summary: [4.4] Operators may not respond to spec changes in managed deployments or dae...
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX
Alias: None
Product: OpenShift Container Platform
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kube-apiserver
Version: 4.4
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
low
medium
Target Milestone: ---
: 4.4.z
Assignee: Maru Newby
QA Contact: Xingxing Xia
URL:
Whiteboard: LifecycleReset
Depends On: 1827050
Blocks: 1827052
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2020-04-23 07:12 UTC by Maru Newby
Modified: 2020-08-31 15:00 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of: 1827050
: 1827052 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2020-08-31 14:00:15 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
mfojtik: needinfo?

Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Maru Newby 2020-04-23 07:12:46 UTC 
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1827050 +++

Operators that rely on library-go's Apply{DaemonSet,Deployment} function were previously responsible for detecting changes to a managed resource's spec or changes to external resources and forcing a reload. All operators should be updated to use the revised Apply* methods recently merged to library-go [1] to ensure consistent behavior in responding to changes in external resources or changes to the spec of a managed deployment or daemonset.

1: https://github.com/openshift/library-go/pull/773
Comment 1 Maru Newby 2020-05-20 14:37:24 UTC 
The 4.5 fixes are nearly in, will get started on backporting merged fixes to 4.4.
Comment 2 Maru Newby 2020-06-18 14:29:08 UTC 
I’m adding UpcomingSprint, because I was occupied by fixing bugs with higher priority/severity, developing new features with higher priority, or developing new features to improve stability at a macro level. I will revisit this bug next sprint.

The library-go backport has already merged, operators just need to be bumped.
Comment 3 Maru Newby 2020-07-10 21:54:30 UTC 
I’m adding UpcomingSprint, because I was occupied by fixing bugs with higher priority/severity, developing new features with higher priority, or developing new features to improve stability at a macro level. I will revisit this bug next sprint.
Comment 4 Maru Newby 2020-07-31 16:35:00 UTC 
I’m adding UpcomingSprint, because I was occupied by fixing bugs with higher priority/severity, developing new features with higher priority, or developing new features to improve stability at a macro level. I will revisit this bug next sprint.
Comment 5 Maru Newby 2020-08-22 01:42:37 UTC 
This bug will be evaluated next sprint.
Comment 6 Michal Fojtik 2020-08-24 13:12:43 UTC 
This bug hasn't had any activity in the last 30 days. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. As such, we're marking this bug as "LifecycleStale" and decreasing the severity/priority. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please update it, otherwise this bug can be closed in about 7 days. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.
Comment 7 Michal Fojtik 2020-08-31 14:00:15 UTC 
This bug hasn't had any activity 7 days after it was marked as LifecycleStale, so we are closing this bug as WONTFIX. If you consider this bug still valuable, please reopen it or create new bug.
Comment 8 Michal Fojtik 2020-08-31 15:00:13 UTC 
The LifecycleStale keyword was removed because the bug got commented on recently.
The bug assignee was notified.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.