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

SDN test should wait longer for namespaces #15700

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 9, 2017

Conversation

smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor

Flaking heavily in master

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 9, 2017
@openshift-merge-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: smarterclayton

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these OWNERS Files:

You can indicate your approval by writing /approve in a comment
You can cancel your approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@smarterclayton smarterclayton added kind/test-flake Categorizes issue or PR as related to test flakes. queue/critical-fix and removed size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Aug 9, 2017
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 9, 2017
@smarterclayton smarterclayton added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 9, 2017
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. label Aug 9, 2017
@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor Author

@deads2k integration is continually flaking, this is extracted from my integration refactor where it stomped that

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

openshift-ci-robot commented Aug 9, 2017

@smarterclayton: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun them all:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
ci/openshift-jenkins/extended_conformance_gce dbd7e47 link /test extended_conformance_gce
ci/openshift-jenkins/end_to_end dbd7e47 link /test end_to_end
ci/openshift-jenkins/extended_conformance_install_update dbd7e47 link /test extended_conformance_install_update
ci/openshift-jenkins/extended_templates dbd7e47 link /test extended_templates

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor Author

e2e failed building images but didn't exit: #15702

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor Author

Passed integration. Force merging.

@deads2k
Copy link
Contributor

deads2k commented Aug 9, 2017

@deads2k integration is continually flaking, this is extracted from my integration refactor where it stomped that

You think that non-parallel it takes more than two seconds to observe a create?

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor Author

smarterclayton commented Aug 9, 2017 via email

@danwinship
Copy link
Contributor

You think that non-parallel it takes more than two seconds to observe a create?

It's not just failing to observe the creation of the newly-created namespace. It doesn't even observe the existence of "default". Maybe something is causing startup of the shared informer to be unexpectedly slow?

@deads2k
Copy link
Contributor

deads2k commented Aug 9, 2017

It's not just failing to observe the creation of the newly-created namespace. It doesn't even observe the existence of "default". Maybe something is causing startup of the shared informer to be unexpectedly slow?

Hard to believe that would happen just this informer/handler pair and never another or at least not to anything approaching the same degree

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor Author

smarterclayton commented Aug 9, 2017 via email

@smarterclayton
Copy link
Contributor Author

smarterclayton commented Aug 9, 2017 via email

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. kind/test-flake Categorizes issue or PR as related to test flakes. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. queue/critical-fix size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants