Skip to content

etcd healthz, hotloop fixes #19992

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Jun 14, 2018
Merged

etcd healthz, hotloop fixes #19992

merged 4 commits into from
Jun 14, 2018

Conversation

liggitt
Copy link
Contributor

@liggitt liggitt commented Jun 13, 2018 •
edited
Loading

  • fixes CPU hotloop in etcd client (pending upstream review, needs picking to our branch and update-deps)
  • fixes etcd healthz check to use an actual client (makes it less vulnerable to spurious dns lookup timeouts)
  • fixes typo in healthz filter exemption

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jun 13, 2018
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: liggitt

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

The pull request process is described here

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jun 13, 2018
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Jun 13, 2018
@liggitt
Copy link
Contributor Author

liggitt commented Jun 13, 2018

/retest

@liggitt
Copy link
Contributor Author

liggitt commented Jun 13, 2018

@mfojtik @deads2k please review, then I'll move the etcd client commit to our repo branch

deads2k
deads2k reviewed Jun 13, 2018
View reviewed changes
pkg/cmd/server/origin/webconsole_proxy.go
@@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ func withAssetServerRedirect(handler http.Handler, accessor *webConsolePublicURL
func (c *MasterConfig) withConsoleRedirection(handler, assetServerHandler http.Handler, accessor *webConsolePublicURLAccessor) http.Handler {
return http.HandlerFunc(func(w http.ResponseWriter, req *http.Request) {
// blacklist well known paths so we do not risk recursion deadlocks
for _, prefix := range []string{"/apis", "/api", "/oapi", "/healtz", "/version"} {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@simo5 awkward. :)

Copy link
Contributor

@simo5 simo5 Jun 13, 2018 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Uups, I guess healthz was not the one that caused the loop :-)

deads2k
deads2k reviewed Jun 13, 2018
View reviewed changes
vendor/k8s.io/kubernetes/staging/src/k8s.io/apiserver/pkg/server/options/etcd.go
c.RESTOptionsGetter = &storageFactoryRestOptionsFactory{Options: *s, StorageFactory: factory}
return nil
}

func (s *EtcdOptions) addEtcdHealthEndpoint(c *server.Config) {
func (s *EtcdOptions) addEtcdHealthEndpoint(c *server.Config) error {
healthCheck, err := storagefactory.CreateHealthCheck(s.StorageConfig)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

pre-existing, but if I called ApplyWithStorageFactoryTo wouldn't I expect to use the StorageConfig that's available from the StorageFactory?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yes, though we lack the information required to get the specific config to set up the health check here. I don't see that getting addressed as part of this

@deads2k
Copy link
Contributor

deads2k commented Jun 13, 2018

lgtm

@liggitt liggitt changed the title WIP - etcd healthz, hotloop fixes etcd healthz, hotloop fixes Jun 13, 2018
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jun 13, 2018
@liggitt liggitt mentioned this pull request Jun 13, 2018
Merged
@runcom
Copy link
Member

runcom commented Jun 13, 2018

fix for cadvisor went in (sorry for that.)

@liggitt liggitt added this to the v3.10 milestone Jun 14, 2018
@liggitt
Copy link
Contributor Author

liggitt commented Jun 14, 2018

tagging per #19992 (comment)

@liggitt liggitt added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jun 14, 2018
@liggitt
Copy link
Contributor Author

liggitt commented Jun 14, 2018

/retest

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 245cf6d into openshift:master Jun 14, 2018
@liggitt liggitt deleted the etcd-healthz branch June 14, 2018 18:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@deads2k deads2k deads2k left review comments

@adelton adelton Awaiting requested review from adelton

@stevekuznetsov stevekuznetsov Awaiting requested review from stevekuznetsov

+1 more reviewer

@simo5 simo5 simo5 left review comments

Reviewers whose approvals may not affect merge requirements
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v3.10
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
6 participants
@liggitt @openshift-ci-robot @deads2k @runcom @simo5 @openshift-merge-robot