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

Add Alluxio master web ports to Ingress in Helm chart #14290

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master-2.x
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ZhuTopher
Copy link
Contributor

This PR just introduces a very simplified Ingress to expose the Master pod(s) web and job-web ports.

Note that the Helm chart is not responsible for defining corresponding Ingress Controllers, so this is just a utility for defining an Ingress for the Master web ports.

Comment on lines 17 to 21
{{- if .Capabilities.APIVersions.Has "networking.k8s.io/v1beta1" }}
apiVersion: networking.k8s.io/v1beta1
{{- else }}
apiVersion: networking.k8s.io/v1
{{- end }}
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The networking.k8s.io/v1 API version were introduced in Kubernetes 1.19+, and the networking.k8s.io/v1beta1 API version is being deprecated as of 1.22.

I opted to make the else case be the GA version of the API version rather than the beta one to indicate that use of the beta API version is an edge-case rather than the default.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wow this is finally coming! I anticipate a lot of compatibility issues raised and much tweaks like this have to be added in our helm chart :(
I never really realized how fast k8s versions change and how short their support window is for each version. I'll give it a bit more thoughts and probably add comments later.

@ZhuTopher ZhuTopher assigned ZhuTopher and unassigned LuQQiu Oct 22, 2021
@codecov-commenter
Copy link

codecov-commenter commented Oct 22, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #14290 (7ef96b6) into master (6a18760) will decrease coverage by 12.72%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##             master   #14290       +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage     43.03%   30.31%   -12.73%     
+ Complexity     9308     5935     -3373     
=============================================
  Files          1448     1448               
  Lines         84203    84203               
  Branches      10178    10178               
=============================================
- Hits          36239    25524    -10715     
- Misses        44960    56555    +11595     
+ Partials       3004     2124      -880     
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
...mon/src/main/java/alluxio/shell/CommandReturn.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
...mon/src/main/java/alluxio/util/ExceptionUtils.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
...n/src/main/java/alluxio/wire/AlluxioProxyInfo.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
.../src/main/java/alluxio/wire/AlluxioMasterInfo.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
...src/main/java/alluxio/job/meta/JobIdGenerator.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
...n/src/main/java/alluxio/stress/BaseParameters.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
...main/java/alluxio/underfs/options/ListOptions.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
...main/java/alluxio/worker/block/io/BlockReader.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
...main/java/alluxio/worker/block/io/BlockWriter.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
...mon/src/main/java/alluxio/table/common/Layout.java 0.00% <0.00%> (-100.00%) ⬇️
... and 413 more

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 6a18760...7ef96b6. Read the comment docs.

Copy link
Contributor

@jiacheliu3 jiacheliu3 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Added some quick comments. I haven't really seen an real Ingress so I'll probably explore a bit more before adding more comments or giving PTAL. Thx!

service:
name: {{ $fullName }}-{{ $masterName }}
port:
number: 19999
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Parameterize the port?

service:
name: {{ $fullName }}-{{ $masterName }}
port:
number: 20002
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same as above

Comment on lines 17 to 21
{{- if .Capabilities.APIVersions.Has "networking.k8s.io/v1beta1" }}
apiVersion: networking.k8s.io/v1beta1
{{- else }}
apiVersion: networking.k8s.io/v1
{{- end }}
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wow this is finally coming! I anticipate a lot of compatibility issues raised and much tweaks like this have to be added in our helm chart :(
I never really realized how fast k8s versions change and how short their support window is for each version. I'll give it a bit more thoughts and probably add comments later.

@ZhuTopher
Copy link
Contributor Author

This Ingress definition currently doesn't work because the relative links in our web pages target / instead of the configured proxy base paths. So this PR is blocked until issue #14277 is resolved.

@ZhuTopher
Copy link
Contributor Author

ZhuTopher commented Oct 25, 2021

Test validation of this PR is blocked by this git issue. The ingress definition itself correctly reroutes the initial request, but subsequent links from the webpage are not being routed through the right base path.

I was using the nginx ingress controller for testing.

  • add_base_url was deprecated in this PR

Perhaps the X-Forwarded-For header could be used?

@github-actions
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale The PR/Issue does not have recent activities and will be closed automatically label Jan 27, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale The PR/Issue does not have recent activities and will be closed automatically label May 16, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale The PR/Issue does not have recent activities and will be closed automatically label Jun 15, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale The PR/Issue does not have recent activities and will be closed automatically label Jun 25, 2024
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in two weeks if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale The PR/Issue does not have recent activities and will be closed automatically label Jul 26, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
stale The PR/Issue does not have recent activities and will be closed automatically
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants