Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Simplify the node backoff logic #960
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
Simplify the node backoff logic #960
Changes from all commits
7df4717
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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 think we want to back off on any error. With this logic, we'll let the attacher retry until api quota gets exhausted. I think we would rather not even reach that point.
I don't think there's a case where immediate retries are useful?
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 agree. I think we should backoff for all errors from executeControllerUnpublishVolume, but we have also seen a customer case where executeControllerUnpublishVolume returns true:
ControllerUnpublishVolume succeeded for disk. Already not attached.
They still ended up with the same issue where the finalizer external-attacher/pd-csi-storage-gke-io was still set on the VA. I think the CSI attacher was the one that kept retrying because the csi-attacher logs repeatedVA csi-xx for volume projects/xx/zones/us-east4-a/disks/pvc-xx has attached status true but actual state false. Adding back to VA queue for forced reprocessing
Which made the kubecontroller manager keep trying to force detach but failing.
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.
To elaborate, in some cases,
instance, err := gceCS.CloudProvider.GetInstanceOrError(ctx, instanceZone, instanceName)
will still return the instance , but the device will not show up under devices when we call
common.GetDeviceName(volKey)
, so then controllerUnpublishVolume returns true, but then we never called detachDisk (which I am assuming is what makes VA attached status to be false). So then the csi-attacher keeps queuing the VA.VA csi-xx has attached status true but actual state false. Adding back to VA queue for forced reprocessing