-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1
feat(controller): added nameOverride to buckets (#111) #116
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
Junjus
wants to merge
2
commits into
bmarinov:main
Choose a base branch
from
Junjus:feat/bucket-nameOverride
base: main
Could not load branches
Branch not found: {{ refName }}
Loading
Could not load tags
Nothing to show
Loading
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Some commits from the old base branch may be removed from the timeline,
and old review comments may become outdated.
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
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.
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.
Question on this
BucketID != ""check in general (not only in this location): here the empty BucketID is used as a signal that the bucket does not exist on Garage. So check -> bucket missing externally -> create a new one on line 337. Then we store the ID in the status field.What will be the result if the controller fails to persist this ID? For example, take a look what happens on conflict - on line 125. Conflicts here are routine rather than an edge case (a second reconcile is in flight). The patch can fail for other reasons too, or the controller process may get terminated.
Unless I am missing something, the next reconcile run sees
BucketID == ""and gets into the branch at line 348. ThenameOverridefield is correctly immutable, but the user is now stuck with an impossible to reconcile bucket.The difiference with
resolveNewBucketis that the unique UID suffix ties a Garage bucket to theBucketAPI resource we are reconciling. This guarantees ownership and readopting is safe. The same is not true for this new branch.How would you approach it? This is otherwise sound, just the failure paths need to be more robust.