Skip to content

Restore chunked behaviour of target group creation in LBv2#527

Merged
k8s-ci-robot merged 1 commit into
kubernetes:masterfrom
JoelSpeed:restore-ensure-targetgrouptargets
Dec 9, 2022
Merged

Restore chunked behaviour of target group creation in LBv2#527
k8s-ci-robot merged 1 commit into
kubernetes:masterfrom
JoelSpeed:restore-ensure-targetgrouptargets

Conversation

@JoelSpeed

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed commented Oct 28, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What type of PR is this?

Uncomment only one, leave it on its own line:

/kind api-change
/kind bug
/kind cleanup
/kind design
/kind documentation
/kind failing-test
/kind feature
/kind flake

What this PR does / why we need it:

When kubernetes/kubernetes##101592 introduced the target group registration chunking, this is how the target groups were being registered. Then we would return. The rest of this function was intended to handle the case where the load balancer already exists.

#293, I believe, accidentally removed the target registration from the "create" part of this function, creating the bug #301. #302 resolved this by allowing the function to fall through to the "update" section of the code.

Since we don't need to run the checks for existing and dirty health checks on create, I think we should restore the original behaviour to prevent those unnecessary API calls.

I've manually tested this myself by building a cluster and checking that when I create an NLB backed service, the targets are registered correctly on the first instance.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

None

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Oct 28, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@JoelSpeed: This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If cloud-provider-aws contributors determine this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. label Oct 28, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Oct 28, 2022
@olemarkus

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Thanks for looking at this. The cyclomatic complexity of that function is off the charts ... apologies for introducing bugs.

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 1, 2022
@JoelSpeed

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

The cyclomatic complexity of that function is off the charts ... apologies for introducing bugs.

Yeah it's pretty bad! No worries!

@DekusDenial

DekusDenial commented Dec 9, 2022

Copy link
Copy Markdown

any ETA of merging this fix? I went into the same case where instances were not registered in the respective target groups

@JoelSpeed

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/assign @andrewsykim

Are you able to approve Andrew?

@olemarkus

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I will have a look. I'm doing the 1.26 release in not too long and should get this in before that.

@olemarkus

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: olemarkus

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Dec 9, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit e8df13a into kubernetes:master Dec 9, 2022
@DekusDenial

Copy link
Copy Markdown

So do we know when the fix will be rolled out to EKS. Will it be in the form of another EKS platform version? Thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants