-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 28
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.
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
Fixes 2702,2887: Add orgID to snapshot list endpoint #435
Conversation
1da5d1b
to
07951b1
Compare
dd0dd51
to
58bb8a0
Compare
91cd454
to
12c7cb3
Compare
01de13b
to
0abde92
Compare
0abde92
to
61ccda7
Compare
I'm not sure why, but it looks like most of the test didn't run. Do you see that too? |
Hi, Not sure why test run was incomplete (I see |
/retest |
1 similar comment
/retest |
ec63892
to
bd3b872
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It says in your summary that create/update/delete do not have an effect for red hat repositories. Right now, if my org ID is -1, I can delete/update but not create. Obviously, that's not a real use case, but I feel the behavior should probably be consistent unless there's a reason for it not to be.
Do we expect to want to delete/update red hat repositories from the API? Or should that be blocked the way create is blocked?
@@ -587,7 +606,7 @@ func (r repositoryConfigDaoImpl) bulkDelete(tx *gorm.DB, orgID string, uuids []s | |||
var err error | |||
var repoConfig models.RepositoryConfiguration | |||
|
|||
if repoConfig, err = r.fetchRepoConfig(orgID, uuids[i]); err != nil { | |||
if repoConfig, err = r.fetchRepoConfig(orgID, uuids[i], false); err != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If I try to bulk delete a red hat repo, I correctly get the "not found" error. BUT it's returning a 500 response code instead of a 404
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I was able to fix this issue, I think we largely just weren't hitting it before, and it was pre-existing.
@swadeley we've added a command to run when deploying to ephemeral that should snapshot a small rhel repo (Red Hat Ansible Engine 2 for RHEL 8 x86_64 (RPMs)) Hopefully there's enough memory for it to snapshot. Note that it doesn't 'block' deployment on the snapshot, it happens in the background. I'll spin it up to verify as well once the image is built |
I've updated the init container to first wait until pulp is up before triggering the task. I haven't been able to test this in ephemeral, as i can't seem to get the deployment.yaml changes to take effect when pointing to it with my local bonfire config. I'm not 100% sure why. |
So i got it working, about half the time :/ the other half the time, there is some timing issue and the snapshot task is not scheduled. Pushing up some debugging |
Hi, I have had this PR and the frontend [1] deployed for over 24 hours. I saw the Ansible repo was snapshotted right away, but still no RHEL repos due to "Killed by signal 9." as mentioned before [2]. Let me know when I should redeploy to test a new image. Thank you [1] content-services/content-sources-frontend#156 |
This reverts commit 9318ada.
@swadeley yes, we'll likely not ever see these large rhel repos be snapshotable in ephemeral. |
@swadeley so this should be good to merge if you are okay with it. I have removed my debugging output |
/retest |
1 similar comment
/retest |
@rverdile oh... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
nice!!
Summary
HMS-2702
HMS 2887
Additional changes:
Testing steps