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(operator): Extend status to show difference between running and ready #11968

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Mar 4, 2024

Conversation

xperimental
Copy link
Collaborator

@xperimental xperimental commented Feb 15, 2024

What this PR does / why we need it:

Currently the Loki Operator emits the ReadyCondition even when there are pods running but not ready yet. It looks like this causes error conditions to get lost by support and users, because they do not notice the pods in unready state.

This PR tries to fix this issue by only emitting the ReadyCondition when all LokiStack managed pods are ready and falling back to PendingCondition with a different message when all pods are running but some are missing their readiness check.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes LOG-5160

Special notes for your reviewer:

  • An alternative implementation would be to introduce a new condition instead of including the "running but not ready" status in the PendingCondition.
  • This PR also contains an unrelated change ("storage status is overwritten"). This can be split into a separate PR.

Checklist

  • Reviewed the CONTRIBUTING.md guide (required)
  • Tests updated
  • CHANGELOG.md updated

Copy link
Collaborator

@JoaoBraveCoding JoaoBraveCoding left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Overall looks like a great addition

operator/internal/status/storage.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@xperimental xperimental changed the title operator: Extend status to show difference between running and ready fix(operator): Extend status to show difference between running and ready Mar 1, 2024
@xperimental xperimental marked this pull request as ready for review March 1, 2024 17:40
@xperimental xperimental requested review from periklis and a team as code owners March 1, 2024 17:40
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants