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

Node update-execute problem with single node #974

Closed
gsstoykov opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #981
Closed

Node update-execute problem with single node #974

gsstoykov opened this issue Dec 10, 2024 · 1 comment · Fixed by #981
Assignees
Labels
Bug A error that causes the feature to behave differently than what was expected based on design docs Pending Triage New issue that needs to be triaged by the team released

Comments

@gsstoykov
Copy link

gsstoykov commented Dec 10, 2024

Describe the bug

node update-execute is failing when we create a single node in solo init.

npm run solo -- node update-execute --input-dir context --namespace solo-e2e

> @hashgraph/solo@0.99.0 solo
> node --no-deprecation --no-warnings dist/solo.js node update-execute --input-dir context --namespace solo-e2e


******************************* Solo *********************************************
Version			: 0.99.0
Kubernetes Context	: kind-solo-e2e
Kubernetes Cluster	: kind-solo-e2e
Kubernetes Namespace	: solo-e2e
**********************************************************************************
✔ Initialize [0.1s]
  ✔ Acquire lease - lease acquired successfully, attempt: 1/10
✔ Load remote config - remote config not found
✔ Load context data
✔ Check all nodes are ACTIVE [7s]
  ✔ Check network pod: node1  - status FREEZE_COMPLETE, attempt: 0/120 [7s]
✖ Invalid pod network-undefined-0
◼ Prepare staging directory
◼ Copy node keys to secrets
◼ Get node logs and configs
◼ Update chart to use new configMap due to account number change
◼ Kill nodes to pick up updated configMaps
◼ Check node pods are running
◼ Fetch platform software into network nodes
◼ Setup network nodes
◼ Starting nodes
◼ Enable port forwarding for JVM debugger
◼ Check all nodes are ACTIVE
◼ Check all node proxies are ACTIVE
◼ Trigger stake weight calculate
◼ Finalize
*********************************** ERROR *****************************************
Error in executing node update: Invalid pod network-undefined-0
***********************************************************************************

Describe the expected behavior

Network is successfully updated after update-execute

To Reproduce

rm -rf ~/.solo/cache
export SOLO_CLUSTER_NAME=solo-e2e
export SOLO_NAMESPACE=solo-e2e
export SOLO_CLUSTER_SETUP_NAMESPACE=fullstack-setup
kind delete cluster -n "${SOLO_CLUSTER_NAME}"
kind create cluster -n "${SOLO_CLUSTER_NAME}"
npm run solo -- init
npm run solo -- node keys -i node1 --gossip-keys --tls-keys
npm run solo -- cluster setup
npm run solo -- network deploy -i node1 -n solo-e2e
npm run solo -- node setup -i node1 -n solo-e2e
npm run solo -- node start -i node1 -n solo-e2e
npm run solo -- node update-prepare --namespace solo-e2e --output-dir context --node-alias node1

SDK executes NodeUpdateTransaction freeze transactions successfully.

npm run solo -- node update-execute --input-dir context --namespace solo-e2e

Additional Context

No response

@gsstoykov gsstoykov added Bug A error that causes the feature to behave differently than what was expected based on design docs Pending Triage New issue that needs to be triaged by the team labels Dec 10, 2024
@Ivo-Yankov Ivo-Yankov self-assigned this Dec 11, 2024
@swirlds-automation
Copy link
Contributor

🎉 This issue has been resolved in version 0.32.0 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug A error that causes the feature to behave differently than what was expected based on design docs Pending Triage New issue that needs to be triaged by the team released
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants