[CONS-7278] Ensure missing volume mounts are added in case of webhook reinvocation #37091
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
github-actions
bot
added
team/container-platform
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision✅ Passed |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: ad19965 Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | docker_containers_cpu | % cpu utilization | +1.78 | [-2.12, +5.68] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_logs | memory utilization | +1.18 | [+1.05, +1.30] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +1.10 | [-1.67, +3.88] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_metrics | memory utilization | +0.68 | [+0.52, +0.84] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.36 | [+0.26, +0.47] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.23 | [+0.17, +0.29] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders | memory utilization | +0.19 | [+0.15, +0.23] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.08 | [-0.61, +0.76] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | docker_containers_memory | memory utilization | +0.06 | [-0.02, +0.14] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.26, +0.27] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.03, +0.02] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.65, +0.62] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.64, +0.61] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.02 | [-0.08, +0.04] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.69, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.03 | [-0.25, +0.20] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.03 | [-0.69, +0.63] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.06 | [-0.69, +0.58] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | -0.09 | [-0.75, +0.56] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics | memory utilization | -0.28 | [-0.40, -0.16] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_logs | memory utilization | -0.50 | [-0.63, -0.37] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.56 | [-0.71, -0.41] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -0.57 | [-1.45, +0.30] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✅ | docker_containers_cpu | simple_check_run | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | docker_containers_memory | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | docker_containers_memory | simple_check_run | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
Explanation
Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%
Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:
- ✅ = significantly better comparison variant performance
- ❌ = significantly worse comparison variant performance
- ➖ = no significant change in performance
A regression test is an A/B test of target performance in a repeatable rig, where "performance" is measured as "comparison variant minus baseline variant" for an optimization goal (e.g., ingress throughput). Due to intrinsic variability in measuring that goal, we can only estimate its mean value for each experiment; we report uncertainty in that value as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI".
For each experiment, we decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if all of the following criteria are true:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
Its 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" does not contain zero, indicating that if our statistical model is accurate, there is at least a 90.00% chance there is a difference in performance between baseline and comparison variants.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
adel121
force-pushed
the
adelhajhassan/ensure_volumemounts_are_added_on_webhook_reinvocation
branch
from
880cf66 to
ae3d4ee
Compare
adel121
force-pushed
the
adelhajhassan/ensure_volumemounts_are_added_on_webhook_reinvocation
branch
from
ae3d4ee to
e884a2e
Compare
Static quality checks✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates Successful checksInfo
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
Fixes an issue that causes missing injecting volume mounts by the admission controller in case external webhooks are involved in the mutation process.
This occurs because the order by which a pod is mutated by multiple mutating admission webhooks is not well defined and can be random. Kubernetes keeps reinvoking webhooks on the pod until the pod template is stable and not changing anymore (with a recursion depth limit in case an infinite loop happens in some edge cases).
In this specific case, we have a utility function that injects a volume and adds volume mounts to the existing containers and init containers. The problem with the current implementation is that if we find out that the volume already exists (we match volumes name), we directly return without adding any volume mounts. Consequently, if a third party webhook injects an init container after we had already mutated the pod, the injected init container will not get the volume mount.
This PR makes sure we still update the volume mounts even if the volume already exists.
Motivation
Fix customer issue.
Related to #36475
Describe how you validated your changes
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
If the user manually adds a volume colliding with volumes injected by datadog's admission controller, it might result in inadvertently adding volume mounts to containers.
However, this is an extreme edge case that is okay to not cover (specifically, it is not straightforward to handle it).
Additional Notes