Improve error message for unknown error in validateTargetRef
#8299
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
cncf-cla: yes
|
Welcome @RadaBDimitrova! |
k8s-ci-robot
added
area/vertical-pod-autoscaler
needs-ok-to-test
|
Hi @RadaBDimitrova. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: RadaBDimitrova The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
size/XS
|
/ok-to-test |
k8s-ci-robot
added
ok-to-test
| @@ -586,7 +586,7 @@ func (feeder *clusterStateFeeder) validateTargetRef(ctx context.Context, vpa *vp | |||
| return false, condition{conditionType: vpa_types.ConfigUnsupported, delete: false, message: fmt.Sprintf("Error checking if target is a topmost well-known or scalable controller: %s", err)} | |||
| } | |||
| if top == nil { | |||
| return false, condition{conditionType: vpa_types.ConfigUnsupported, delete: false, message: fmt.Sprintf("Unknown error during checking if target is a topmost well-known or scalable controller: %s", err)} | |||
| return false, condition{conditionType: vpa_types.ConfigUnsupported, delete: false, message: fmt.Sprintf("Unknown error during checking if target is a topmost well-known or scalable controller with controller key: %s", k)} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does ControllerKeyWithAPIVersion has a String func defined? How is this stringified? Could you share how the message looks like with this PR?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The following ControllerKeyWithAPIVersion:
ControllerKeyWithAPIVersion{ControllerKey: ControllerKey{
Name: testJob, Kind: "Job", Namespace: testNamespace}}
would be stringified like this:
{{test-namespace Job test-job} }
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is {{test-namespace Job test-job} } something you would like to see when looking into the VPA status? Can we improve this?
| @@ -586,7 +586,7 @@ func (feeder *clusterStateFeeder) validateTargetRef(ctx context.Context, vpa *vp | |||
| return false, condition{conditionType: vpa_types.ConfigUnsupported, delete: false, message: fmt.Sprintf("Error checking if target is a topmost well-known or scalable controller: %s", err)} | |||
| } | |||
| if top == nil { | |||
| return false, condition{conditionType: vpa_types.ConfigUnsupported, delete: false, message: fmt.Sprintf("Unknown error during checking if target is a topmost well-known or scalable controller: %s", err)} | |||
| return false, condition{conditionType: vpa_types.ConfigUnsupported, delete: false, message: fmt.Sprintf("Unknown error during checking if target is a topmost well-known or scalable controller with controller key: %s", k)} | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
| return false, condition{conditionType: vpa_types.ConfigUnsupported, delete: false, message: fmt.Sprintf("Unknown error during checking if target is a topmost well-known or scalable controller with controller key: %s", k)} | |
| return false, condition{conditionType: vpa_types.ConfigUnsupported, delete: false, message: fmt.Sprintf("Unknown error during checking if target %s is a topmost well-known or scalable controller", k)} |
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR improves the info given when met with an "unknown error" during
validateTargetRefsince there have been multiple occasions where I've seen the following error and there are multiple paths in the code that could possibly lead to it:Up until now there's a possibility to print a nil err, which doesn't really help with debugging the actual problem.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
N/A
Special notes for your reviewer:
/cc @ialidzhikov
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?
Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.: