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

etcd bbolt robustness tests fail to run #33737

Open
ivanvc opened this issue Oct 29, 2024 · 4 comments
Open

etcd bbolt robustness tests fail to run #33737

ivanvc opened this issue Oct 29, 2024 · 4 comments
Labels
kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one.

Comments

@ivanvc
Copy link
Member

ivanvc commented Oct 29, 2024

What happened:

While migrating etcd bbolt ARM64 GitHub workflows to the prow infrastructure, we're facing issues trying to enable our robustness tests. Bbolt robustness tests require dm-flakey, which requires xfsprogs (XFS). I believe the problem is that the host machine doesn't have support/or uses that file system. Even though this is initially required for our ARM64 jobs, we would expect to have it working for the AMD64 architecture in the future.

What you expected to happen:

We should be able to run the robustness tests in the prow infrastructure.

How to reproduce it (as minimally and precisely as possible):

The pull request etcd-io/bbolt#849 has the changes to attempt to run this prow job.

Please provide links to example occurrences, if any:

Refer to the Prow job logs:

Anything else we need to know?:

Thanks for your help.

@ivanvc ivanvc added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label Oct 29, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. label Oct 29, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

There are no sig labels on this issue. Please add an appropriate label by using one of the following commands:

  • /sig <group-name>
  • /wg <group-name>
  • /committee <group-name>

Please see the group list for a listing of the SIGs, working groups, and committees available.

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.

@ivanvc
Copy link
Member Author

ivanvc commented Oct 29, 2024

Link to etcd-io/bbolt#848

@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member

If you have strong requirements on the host kernel, the best approach is to spin up an external VM (in a project/account rented from https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/boskos) and NOT depend on what the prow host machines have (and also avoid interacting with the host kernel, versus e.g. running unit tests).

Most subprojects are spinning up kubernetes clusters rather than individual VMs, but you might be able to reach out to folks in sig node about node e2e tests and how they're running those, as the most similar thing we run currently.

@ivanvc
Copy link
Member Author

ivanvc commented Dec 5, 2024

Thanks, @BenTheElder. We (@jmhbnz and I) discussed this with @upodroid at KCS in Utah. It's doable if we do it through a VM. We're waiting for documentation/references on how we could implement this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants