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

utils/etcd.go is not using the v1beta4 EtcdAPICall timeout for etcd API calls #3153

Closed
neolit123 opened this issue Jan 28, 2025 · 2 comments · Fixed by kubernetes/kubernetes#129859
Assignees
Labels
area/etcd kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete.
Milestone

Comments

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

neolit123 commented Jan 28, 2025

we added the new constant EtcdAPITimeout and it's used in etcd.go:
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/release-1.30/cmd/kubeadm/app/util/etcd/etcd.go#L252
but instead, it should be using the configurable Timeouts.EtcdAPICall from v1beta4.
with the singleton pattern kubeadmapi.GetActiveTimeouts().EtcdAPICall.Duration

i'm marking this as a bug since this is not intentional and the original exponential backoff was more time - around 200 seconds, while the new timeout ended up as liner 2 minutes. so, some users on slow systems might hit it on join. e.g. new member joins but it takes more than 2 min to sync the member and the promotion fails.
i wouldn't say it's a regression, but more of a timeout decrease.

i will send PR for 1.33 and backports to avoid the potential issue on older releases.

@neolit123 neolit123 added area/etcd kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. labels Jan 28, 2025
@neolit123 neolit123 added this to the v1.33 milestone Jan 28, 2025
@neolit123 neolit123 self-assigned this Jan 28, 2025
@neolit123
Copy link
Member Author

neolit123 commented Jan 28, 2025

@neolit123 neolit123 added priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete. and removed priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. labels Jan 30, 2025
@neolit123
Copy link
Member Author

one user reported this here
https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C2P1JHS2E/p1738151866727499
probably slow infra.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/etcd kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. priority/important-longterm Important over the long term, but may not be staffed and/or may need multiple releases to complete.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

1 participant