Skip to content

CachedResourceEndpointSlice reconciler shouldn't retry on success #3690

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

CachedResourceEndpointSlice reconciler shouldn't retry on success #3690

wants to merge 1 commit into from
+17 −35

Conversation

@gman0
Copy link
Contributor

@gman0 gman0 commented Oct 29, 2025

Summary

CachedResourceEndpointSlice reconciler kept retrying on success by mistake.

This PR cleans up the reconcile function: retry is done only on error.

What Type of PR Is This?

Related Issue(s)

Fixes #

Release Notes

NONE

@kcp-ci-bot kcp-ci-bot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the DCO. do-not-merge/needs-kind Indicates a PR lacks a `kind/foo` label and requires one. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Oct 29, 2025
gman0
gman0 commented Oct 29, 2025
View reviewed changes
pkg/reconciler/cache/cachedresourceendpointslice/cachedresourceendpointslice_reconcile.go

endpoints.Status.ShardSelector = selector.String()

return true, err
Copy link
Contributor Author

@gman0 gman0 Oct 29, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This here was the bug ^^ the reconciler would requeue the item indefinitely.

@gman0 gman0 added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. and removed do-not-merge/needs-kind Indicates a PR lacks a `kind/foo` label and requires one. labels Oct 29, 2025
@gman0
Copy link
Contributor Author

gman0 commented Oct 29, 2025

/retest

@gman0 gman0 self-assigned this Oct 30, 2025
@gman0
Copy link
Contributor Author

gman0 commented Oct 30, 2025

/retest

1 similar comment
@gman0
Copy link
Contributor Author

gman0 commented Oct 30, 2025

/retest

@gman0
Copy link
Contributor Author

gman0 commented Oct 30, 2025

Err...

=== FAIL: test/e2e/workspace TestInactiveLogicalCluster (1.83s)
    inactive_test.go:48: Shared kcp server will target configuration "/home/prow/go/src/github.com/kcp-dev/kcp/.kcp/admin.kubeconfig"
    inactive_test.go:48: Waiting for readiness for server at https://127.0.0.1:6444
    inactive_test.go:50: Created root:organization workspace root:e2e-workspace-lg7mw as /clusters/8t4eb2y1nffu807x on shard "root"
    inactive_test.go:57: Get the logicalcluster
    inactive_test.go:61: Mark the logicalcluster as inactive
    inactive_test.go:64: 
        	Error Trace:	/home/prow/go/src/github.com/kcp-dev/kcp/test/e2e/workspace/inactive_test.go:64
        	Error:      	Received unexpected error:
        	            	Operation cannot be fulfilled on logicalclusters.core.kcp.io "cluster": the object has been modified; please apply your changes to the latest version and try again
        	Test:       	TestInactiveLogicalCluster

@gman0
Copy link
Contributor Author

gman0 commented Oct 30, 2025

/retest

@kcp-ci-bot kcp-ci-bot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 4, 2025
@gman0 gman0 force-pushed the cachedresourceendpointslice-reconcile-fix branch from a1030a9 to 5d2e554 Compare November 4, 2025 07:57
@kcp-ci-bot kcp-ci-bot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 4, 2025
mjudeikis
mjudeikis approved these changes Nov 5, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@mjudeikis mjudeikis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm
/approve

@kcp-ci-bot kcp-ci-bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 5, 2025
@kcp-ci-bot
Copy link
Contributor

kcp-ci-bot commented Nov 5, 2025

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 1c9d266baf553d88c2b00ef05d4167e32054855a

@kcp-ci-bot
Copy link
Contributor

kcp-ci-bot commented Nov 5, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mjudeikis

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

@kcp-ci-bot kcp-ci-bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 5, 2025
@gman0
Copy link
Contributor Author

gman0 commented Nov 6, 2025

/retest

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

Reviewers

@mjudeikis mjudeikis mjudeikis approved these changes

Assignees

@gman0 gman0

@mjudeikis mjudeikis

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. dco-signoff: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the DCO. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants

@gman0 @kcp-ci-bot @mjudeikis