Install pdcsi driver in gke scalability test

[leiyiz]

• updated pdcsi installation manifest
• install a default storage class when needed

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:
linked to kubernetes/kubernetes#104722
/assign @mborsz
/assign @mattcary

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @leiyiz!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/perf-tests 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes/perf-tests has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @leiyiz. 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 /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

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/test-infra repository.

[mattcary]

Have you tested this on a migration-enabled cluster to make sure there's not another use of the default storage class hidden in there?

[mborsz]

I don't think we can change default here. This script is used also outside of gcp.

I think we should keep default and set this flag in our tests specifically.

[leiyiz]

make sense, can you give me a pointer on where to change this flag? it's nowhere to be found in perf-tests repo

[mborsz]

You can set any env variable for a given test in test-infra repo.

Here I recommend changing this in preset-e2e-scalability-periodics-master preset which will automatically affect all periodic jobs using master branch:

https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/blob/2cb4ec605eed0c0db0c624a2990779fff43114b4/config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-scalability/sig-scalability-presets.yaml#L314

Then you should add this variable to other presets as described in kubernetes/test-infra#19710 (comment)

The potential problem is that once we add this to preset-e2e-scalability-periodics (as described there), this will affect also release presubmits in file:

https://github.com/kubernetes/test-infra/blob/c3b32daef3348869e9c4621b875c8de07120622b/config/jobs/kubernetes/sig-release/release-branch-jobs/1.22.yaml#L370

which are also using this presubmit. Setting this env in that file will try to use perf-tests/release-1.22 version of this code DEPLOY_GCI_DRIVER which isn't intended.

I recommend manually adding --env= DEPLOY_GCI_DRIVER=false in all release-branch-jobs/1.X.yaml that are using preset-e2e-scalability-periodics to override this preset value.

I know it's quite complicated, we can figure out details during test-infra PR reviews.

[mborsz]

Please do not update vendor/. It's simply a copy of some external repo. All changes should go to those repos.

In fact, I don't think we need any changes to vendor, do we?

[leiyiz]

Please do not update vendor/. It's simply a copy of some external repo. All changes should go to those repos.

In fact, I don't think we need any changes to vendor, do we?

so the runner.sh I think needs to be changed because the config in the prometheus/manifests/0ssd-storage-class.yaml will not get reflected. maybe some bug in this repo can fix it but for now I am just trying to get pdcsi install correctly. Converted to draft for now.

update: I kinda got confused with prometheus.go and runner.go and all that, but anyway had some conversation with matt and we think installing pdcsi driver might not work and we'll probably have to 1.convert scalability test to use kubetest2 and 2.use cloud-provider-gcp to bring up cluster.

[mborsz]

Please do not update vendor/. It's simply a copy of some external repo. All changes should go to those repos.
In fact, I don't think we need any changes to vendor, do we?

so the runner.sh I think needs to be changed because the config in the prometheus/manifests/0ssd-storage-class.yaml will not get reflected. maybe some bug in this repo can fix it but for now I am just trying to get pdcsi install correctly. Converted to draft for now.

I don't think you need to update vendor to pickup changes in prometheus/manifests/0ssd-storage-class.yaml. It's used by prometheus-operator in this repo and AFAIK changing value in yaml should just work.

[leiyiz]

Please do not update vendor/. It's simply a copy of some external repo. All changes should go to those repos.
In fact, I don't think we need any changes to vendor, do we?

so the runner.sh I think needs to be changed because the config in the prometheus/manifests/0ssd-storage-class.yaml will not get reflected. maybe some bug in this repo can fix it but for now I am just trying to get pdcsi install correctly. Converted to draft for now.

I don't think you need to update vendor to pickup changes in prometheus/manifests/0ssd-storage-class.yaml. It's used by prometheus-operator in this repo and AFAIK changing value in yaml should just work.

Yes, I got vender/ confused with prometheus.go, indeed vendor/ doesn't needs to be changed. But just changing the yaml did not get picked up.

[leiyiz]

test passed here against kubernetes/kubernetes#104722

[mborsz]

I think it's OK.

Please revert the DEPLOY_GCI_DRIVER default change and LGTM

[leiyiz]

/LGTM

[k8s-ci-robot]

@leiyiz: you cannot LGTM your own PR.

In response to this:

/LGTM

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/test-infra repository.

[leiyiz]

@mborsz

[mborsz]

/lgtm
/approve
/ok-to-test

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: leiyiz, mborsz

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• clusterloader2/OWNERS [mborsz]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment