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

feat: users cannot apply resource requests that exceed 63 characters #419

Open
SaphMB opened this issue Mar 12, 2025 · 2 comments
Open

feat: users cannot apply resource requests that exceed 63 characters #419

SaphMB opened this issue Mar 12, 2025 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request hibiscus

Comments

@SaphMB
Copy link
Member

SaphMB commented Mar 12, 2025

Context
When applying a resource request that exceeds the 63 character limit, the following behaviour occurs:

  • Kratix attempts to reconcile the resource request
  • Due to the request name it error when attempting the set the kratix.io/resource-name label
  • Reconciliation never ends

This is also difficult to recover from as when the deletion timestamp is applies, the reconciler still attempts to parse and set the labels but cannot due to the character limit. Users need to delete the Promise and the kratix.io/resource-request-cleanup finalizer which is less than ideal

Acceptance

Given I have a resource.yaml where the name is greater that 63 characters
When I run kubectl apply -f resource.yaml
Then I am immediately informed that my resource cannot be applied due to the name exceeding 63 characters
And there is no attempt to reconcile the request

@SaphMB SaphMB added enhancement New feature or request hibiscus labels Mar 12, 2025
@catmo-syntasso
Copy link
Member

qq: this is just for resource name, we mentioned on the quick chat that it may also be true for container names, is this the case? do we need a second task for that?
thanks :)

@SaphMB
Copy link
Member Author

SaphMB commented Mar 12, 2025

qq: this is just for resource name, we mentioned on the quick chat that it may also be true for container names, is this the case? do we need a second task for that? thanks :)

Good point @catmo-syntasso , this is captured in #421

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request hibiscus
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants