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

Extract etcd membership validation into a separate phase #770

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

kke
Copy link
Contributor

@kke kke commented Sep 30, 2024

Fixes #768

In conjuction with #769 makes it possible to do something like:

applyOpts := &action.ApplyOpts{....}
applyAction := action.NewApply(applyOpts)
validateEtcdPhase := &phase.ValidateEtcdMembers{}
applyAction.Phases.Remove(validateEtcdPhase.Title())
err := applyAction.Run()

When using k0sctl as a library, this will make apply action skip the etcd member list validation.

@kke kke changed the base branch from main to modifiable-applyaction September 30, 2024 12:38
@kke kke added the chore Housekeeping / typo / code quality improvements label Sep 30, 2024
@kke kke changed the title Separate validate etcd phase Extract etcd membership validation into a separate phase Sep 30, 2024
Base automatically changed from modifiable-applyaction to main October 1, 2024 07:28
@kke kke force-pushed the separate-validate-etcd-phase branch 2 times, most recently from f1f3ef7 to d5f549d Compare October 1, 2024 08:40
Signed-off-by: Kimmo Lehto <klehto@mirantis.com>
@kke kke force-pushed the separate-validate-etcd-phase branch from 4000cac to 3e8146a Compare October 1, 2024 11:19
@kke kke marked this pull request as ready for review October 1, 2024 12:28
@kke
Copy link
Contributor Author

kke commented Oct 1, 2024

Would this resolve the issue for your use-case, @tppolkow?

@tppolkow
Copy link

tppolkow commented Oct 1, 2024

@kke Thanks for looking at it! Ideal situation for us would be to not have to modify any k0sctl code and perhaps skip this via a flag. If that is not an option then I think this would work as a second best option, it is certainly better than the workaround we currently have which is much more involved.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
chore Housekeeping / typo / code quality improvements
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Add option to skip etcd member-list check introduced in #714
2 participants