-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 196
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
OCM-7990 | fix: allow min_replicas 0 with edit machinepools #2040
Conversation
@@ -36,16 +36,6 @@ var _ = Describe("Machinepool", func() { | |||
asBuilder := cmv1.NewMachinePoolAutoscaling().MaxReplicas(2).MinReplicas(0) | |||
Expect(builder).To(Equal(asBuilder)) | |||
}) | |||
|
|||
It("editMachinePoolAutoscaling should allow 0 min and 0 max replicas", func() { |
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.
There is a validation done in CS that prevents users assigning 0 for max mp for autoscaling.
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.
should rosa reports that error before send request to CS side? And then we still need a test case here to verify that
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.
Logic looks good, but I feel you might fail test coverage though as lines were deleted.
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.
Thanks for your review @marcolan018 @chenz4027
In addition to those, the validations on the interactive mode are missing. I will create a separate card so that we can have a robust number of test cases to make sure we surface input validation errors from the CLI before reaching CS.
Trying to have this land in RC4 as quickly as possible.
If no concerns, would you kindly approve?
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.
@davidleerh I am ok with this
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.
Thank you!
Created OCM-8010 for myself to address this.
@davidleerh: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #2040 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 24.55% 24.94% +0.39%
==========================================
Files 143 146 +3
Lines 21613 21774 +161
==========================================
+ Hits 5306 5432 +126
- Misses 15900 15928 +28
- Partials 407 414 +7 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: davidleerh, marcolan018 The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
/cherrypick release_1.2.39 |
@davidleerh: new pull request created: #2041 In response to this:
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-sigs/prow repository. |
FIXED:
A. min and max replicas set at 3
B. edit min replicas only to 0
C. result