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

Use unique bucket names in scenarios where the name is not random #2177

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: development/2.6
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

williamlardier
Copy link
Contributor

@williamlardier williamlardier commented Nov 26, 2024

Issue: ZENKO-4932

We had a scenario using the same (fixed) bucket name. In these kind of scenarios, this is required.
But then if they run in parallel we might have the same bucket being deleted / re-created, and eventually the hook at the end, cleaning up the existing buckets, will fail because of this concurrency problem. The solution is to use unique bucket names.

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 26, 2024

Hello williamlardier,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Available options
name description privileged authored
/after_pull_request Wait for the given pull request id to be merged before continuing with the current one.
/bypass_author_approval Bypass the pull request author's approval
/bypass_build_status Bypass the build and test status
/bypass_commit_size Bypass the check on the size of the changeset TBA
/bypass_incompatible_branch Bypass the check on the source branch prefix
/bypass_jira_check Bypass the Jira issue check
/bypass_peer_approval Bypass the pull request peers' approval
/bypass_leader_approval Bypass the pull request leaders' approval
/approve Instruct Bert-E that the author has approved the pull request. ✍️
/create_pull_requests Allow the creation of integration pull requests.
/create_integration_branches Allow the creation of integration branches.
/no_octopus Prevent Wall-E from doing any octopus merge and use multiple consecutive merge instead
/unanimity Change review acceptance criteria from one reviewer at least to all reviewers
/wait Instruct Bert-E not to run until further notice.
Available commands
name description privileged
/help Print Bert-E's manual in the pull request.
/status Print Bert-E's current status in the pull request TBA
/clear Remove all comments from Bert-E from the history TBA
/retry Re-start a fresh build TBA
/build Re-start a fresh build TBA
/force_reset Delete integration branches & pull requests, and restart merge process from the beginning.
/reset Try to remove integration branches unless there are commits on them which do not appear on the source branch.

Status report is not available.

@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Nov 26, 2024
@scality scality deleted a comment from bert-e Nov 26, 2024
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 26, 2024

Request integration branches

Waiting for integration branch creation to be requested by the user.

To request integration branches, please comment on this pull request with the following command:

/create_integration_branches

Alternatively, the /approve and /create_pull_requests commands will automatically
create the integration branches.

@@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ Feature: IAM Policies for IAM Users
| GetObject | Allow | iu-go-bucket3-1/* | iu-go-bucket3 | exists | |
| GetObject | Allow | iu-go-bucket4/go-object1 | iu-go-bucket4 | exists | go-object |
| GetObject | Deny | * | iu-go-bucket5 | exists | |
| GetObject | Deny | iu-go-bucket5/* | iu-go-bucket5 | exists | |
| GetObject | Deny | iu-go-bucket6/go-object | iu-go-bucket6 | exists | go-object |
| GetObject | Deny | iu-go-bucket6/* | iu-go-bucket6 | exists | |
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Should be great to be able to pass variables generated during the test in the examples, so that the given an existing bucket ... will create an bucket named randomly and in the examples we put something like {bucketName} and it takes the one generated in the beginning
Not sure if it is feasable tho..

Copy link
Contributor Author

@williamlardier williamlardier Nov 26, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We do that in most scenarios, but here we need to specify the resource name, and we actually want to have control over it because sometimes we alter it, so we want to keep it... Still possible to have it fully automatic but we still need to keep support for static bucket names. For example, the bucket used for website must be named "website".

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I know we do that in most scenario, what I suggest here is to be able to use it in example, so here for example we could do ${bucketName}/* in the ressource name
But ofc we need to keep support for creating static bucket names

@williamlardier
Copy link
Contributor Author

/approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 27, 2024

Integration data created

I have created the integration data for the additional destination branches.

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/2.5

You can set option create_pull_requests if you need me to create
integration pull requests in addition to integration branches, with:

@bert-e create_pull_requests

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 27, 2024

Build failed

The build for commit did not succeed in branch bugfix/ZENKO-4932.

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Nov 27, 2024

Build failed

The build for commit did not succeed in branch w/2.9/bugfix/ZENKO-4932.

The following options are set: approve

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants