OCPBUGS-66334: remove version check from guard precheck#1520
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Thomas Jungblut <tjungblu@redhat.com>
|
@tjungblu: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-66334, which is invalid:
Comment The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. DetailsIn response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
WalkthroughRemoved version alignment and synchronization checks from the guardRolloutPreCheck logic in the operator starter. The pre-check now only validates non-SNO topology using NewIsSingleNodePlatformFn, eliminating operator-version gating and etcd clusteroperator status synchronization waits. Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~30 minutes
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro Cache: Disabled due to data retention organization setting Knowledge base: Disabled due to 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
💤 Files with no reviewable changes (1)
Comment |
|
/retest-required |
|
@tjungblu: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. DetailsInstructions 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: dusk125, tjungblu The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
Thanks @dusk125 - I'm going to leave this here until the critical fix label is lifted again |
|
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
|
/remove-lifecycle stale |
|
/verified by ci |
|
@tjungblu: This PR has been marked as verified by DetailsIn response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
/jira refresh |
|
@tjungblu: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-66334, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: DetailsIn response to this:
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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository. |
|
@openshift-ci-robot: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: geliu2016. Note that only openshift members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs. DetailsIn response to this:
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-sigs/prow repository. |
|
/cherry-pick release-4.22 release-4.21 release-4.20 release-4.19 release-4.18 |
|
@tjungblu: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of DetailsIn response to this:
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-sigs/prow repository. |
This was inadvertently deleting guard pods during upgrades, which caused etcd quorum loss while another component drained a node during a static pod rollout.