Skip to content

Adding Necessary Changes to Retry Infeasible Provisions at retryIntervalMax #1369

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

mdzraf
Copy link

@mdzraf mdzraf commented Apr 25, 2025

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR adds the changes necessary to add the ability for the external-provisioner to utilize the version of sig-storage-lib-external-provisioner that treats Provisions that return InvalidArgument and retries them at a slower rate (retryIntervalMax)

Special notes for your reviewer:

Dependencies will be changed once csi-lib-utils and sig-storage-lib-external-provisioner PRs are merged

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Added Ability To Retry Provisions that Return InvalidArgument At retryIntervalMax

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. labels Apr 25, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @mdzraf!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-csi/external-provisioner 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-csi/external-provisioner has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Apr 25, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @mdzraf. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-csi member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mdzraf
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign msau42 for approval. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Apr 25, 2025
@ElijahQuinones
Copy link
Member

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Apr 28, 2025
@mdzraf mdzraf force-pushed the AddSlowRetryFinal branch from d8b4b53 to 1b94dad Compare April 28, 2025 12:29
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 12, 2025
@mdzraf mdzraf force-pushed the AddSlowRetryFinal branch from 1b94dad to d93cdbb Compare June 6, 2025 13:40
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 6, 2025
@mdzraf mdzraf force-pushed the AddSlowRetryFinal branch from d93cdbb to 417c301 Compare June 6, 2025 14:07
@mdzraf mdzraf force-pushed the AddSlowRetryFinal branch from 417c301 to e3c8495 Compare June 30, 2025 13:31
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. and removed release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Jun 30, 2025
@mdzraf mdzraf changed the title [WIP] Adding Necessary Changes to Retry Infeasible Provisions at retryIntervalMax Adding Necessary Changes to Retry Infeasible Provisions at retryIntervalMax Jun 30, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-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 30, 2025
@mdzraf
Copy link
Author

mdzraf commented Jul 2, 2025

CC @jsafrane

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants