Skip to content
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

fix: clarify the update steps in canary with traffic routing #1409

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

huikang
Copy link
Member

@huikang huikang commented Aug 11, 2021

Signed-off-by: Hui Kang [email protected]

close #1405

Checklist:

  • Either (a) I've created an enhancement proposal and discussed it with the community, (b) this is a bug fix, or (c) this is a chore.
  • The title of the PR is (a) conventional, (b) states what changed, and (c) suffixes the related issues number. E.g. "fix(controller): Updates such and such. Fixes #1234".
  • I've signed my commits with DCO
  • I have written unit and/or e2e tests for my change. PRs without these are unlikely to be merged.
  • My builds are green. Try syncing with master if they are not.
  • My organization is added to USERS.md.

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!    Quality Gate passed

Bug A 0 Bugs
Vulnerability A 0 Vulnerabilities
Security Hotspot A 0 Security Hotspots
Code Smell A 0 Code Smells

No Coverage information No Coverage information
4.3% 4.3% Duplication

@huikang
Copy link
Member Author

huikang commented Aug 11, 2021

@harikrongali , could you take a look at this one? Thanks.

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 11, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #1409 (9c019ad) into master (7a0704a) will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #1409   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   81.27%   81.27%           
=======================================
  Files         108      108           
  Lines        9950     9950           
=======================================
  Hits         8087     8087           
  Misses       1309     1309           
  Partials      554      554           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
utils/replicaset/canary.go 82.56% <ø> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update cf19b5b...9c019ad. Read the comment docs.

@harikrongali
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

Comment on lines +155 to +156
Unlike the ReplicaSet based weighted canary, a service mesh/ingress based canary leaves the
stable as 100% scaled until the rollout completes.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

NOTE: this is actually going to change with PR #1382, which will give the user the option to scale down the stable ReplicaSet, as the canary scales up.

So this note should get updated when v1.1 is released. Do you still want to add this note?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You are right, @jessesuen . Thanks.

@huikang huikang closed this Aug 12, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Istio Subset- Level traffic splitting cannot be used for Rolling Update
3 participants