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

release-24.1: roachprod, roachtest: use same cluster name sanitization #124304

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 17, 2024

Conversation

DarrylWong
Copy link
Contributor

Backport 1/1 commits from #123961.

/cc @cockroachdb/release


Previously, roachtest had it's own function to sanitize cluster names, while roachprod had it's own function to verify (but not sanitize) cluster names. This change removes both and opts instead to use vm.DNSSafeName.

This change also introduces MalformedClusterNameError which gives a hint on what is wrong with the name and
tells roachtest not to retry cluster creation.

Fixes: #122633
Epic: none
Release note: none

Release Justification: test infra-only change

Previously, roachtest had it's own function to sanitize
cluster names, while roachprod had it's own function to
verify cluster names. This change removes both and opts
instead to use vm.DNSSafeName.

This change also introduces MalformedClusterNameError
which gives a hint on what is wrong with the name and
tells roachtest not to retry cluster creation.
@DarrylWong DarrylWong requested a review from a team as a code owner May 16, 2024 20:58
@DarrylWong DarrylWong requested review from nameisbhaskar and vidit-bhat and removed request for a team May 16, 2024 20:58
Copy link

blathers-crl bot commented May 16, 2024

Thanks for opening a backport.

Please check the backport criteria before merging:

  • Backports should only be created for serious
    issues
    or test-only changes.
  • Backports should not break backwards-compatibility.
  • Backports should change as little code as possible.
  • Backports should not change on-disk formats or node communication protocols.
  • Backports should not add new functionality (except as defined
    here).
  • Backports must not add, edit, or otherwise modify cluster versions; or add version gates.
  • All backports must be reviewed by the owning areas TL and one additional
    TL. For more information as to how that review should be conducted, please consult the backport
    policy
    .
If your backport adds new functionality, please ensure that the following additional criteria are satisfied:
  • There is a high priority need for the functionality that cannot wait until the next release and is difficult to address in another way.
  • The new functionality is additive-only and only runs for clusters which have specifically “opted in” to it (e.g. by a cluster setting).
  • New code is protected by a conditional check that is trivial to verify and ensures that it only runs for opt-in clusters. State changes must be further protected such that nodes running old binaries will not be negatively impacted by the new state (with a mixed version test added).
  • The PM and TL on the team that owns the changed code have signed off that the change obeys the above rules.
  • Your backport must be accompanied by a post to the appropriate Slack
    channel (#db-backports-point-releases or #db-backports-XX-X-release) for awareness and discussion.

Also, please add a brief release justification to the body of your PR to justify this
backport.

@blathers-crl blathers-crl bot added the backport Label PR's that are backports to older release branches label May 16, 2024
@cockroach-teamcity
Copy link
Member

This change is Reviewable

@srosenberg srosenberg self-requested a review May 16, 2024 22:16
@DarrylWong DarrylWong merged commit ef92f86 into cockroachdb:release-24.1 May 17, 2024
19 of 20 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport Label PR's that are backports to older release branches
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants