kubeadm: add note about 'upgrade apply --config' #16703
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
kind/cleanup
|
/sig cluster-lifecycle |
k8s-ci-robot
added
sig/cluster-lifecycle
k8s-ci-robot
added
language/en
neolit123
force-pushed
the
1.17-kubeadm-upgrade-config-note
branch
from
e3baddf to
377abf2
Compare
|
Deploy preview for kubernetes-io-master-staging ready! Built with commit e3baddf https://deploy-preview-16703--kubernetes-io-master-staging.netlify.com |
|
Deploy preview for kubernetes-io-master-staging ready! Built with commit 2192ca2 https://deploy-preview-16703--kubernetes-io-master-staging.netlify.com |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@neolit123 thanks for this PR!
Only one suggestion in order to better support users while a new solution is implemented for addressing such use cases
| {{< note >}} | ||
| The commands `kubeadm upgrade apply` and `kubeadm upgrade plan` have the legacy `--config` | ||
| flag which makes it possible to reconfigure the cluster, while performing planning or upgrade of that particular | ||
| control-plane node. Usage of the `--config` flag is not recommended and can lead to unexpected results. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should document when this workaround works and how to use it, because ATM this is the best/easiest alternative in the user's hands (e.g updating contol-plane static pods; the command should be run on all the controlplane node)
Usage of the --config flag should not be recommended for the other use cases.
+1 for hinting about replacement with a better solution in future releases
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: “Usage of the --config flag is not recommended and can lead to unexpected results.” is using the passive voice / doesn't address the reader as “you”.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@fabriziopandini i don't even know when --config works and when it's dangerous. we don't have tests for it. unless we enumerate the list of viable usages, i suggest that we keep this note as is.
@sftim suggestions for rewording?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As far as I know, it works fine for changes to extra-args for control plane components, while I'm not sure about everything else.
But, If overall we feel we don't know when the flag it is dangerous then might be we should give a more generic warning "Please be aware that the upgrade workflow was not designed for this scenario and there were reports of unexpected results"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As far as I know, it works fine for changes to extra-args for control plane components, while I'm not sure about everything else.
yes, but for single CP scenarios only.
for multi-CP changes do not automatically propagate.
"Please be aware that the upgrade workflow was not designed for this scenario and there were reports of unexpected results"
i can update the comment.
content/en/docs/reference/setup-tools/kubeadm/kubeadm-upgrade.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
| {{< note >}} | ||
| The commands `kubeadm upgrade apply` and `kubeadm upgrade plan` have the legacy `--config` | ||
| flag which makes it possible to reconfigure the cluster, while performing planning or upgrade of that particular | ||
| control-plane node. Usage of the `--config` flag is not recommended and can lead to unexpected results. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: “Usage of the --config flag is not recommended and can lead to unexpected results.” is using the passive voice / doesn't address the reader as “you”.
content/en/docs/reference/setup-tools/kubeadm/kubeadm-upgrade.md
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
neolit123
force-pushed
the
1.17-kubeadm-upgrade-config-note
branch
from
377abf2 to
2192ca2
Compare
|
@zacharysarah @fabriziopandini @sftim |
|
@neolit123 Approving, @fabriziopandini can EDIT: Sorry, I just caught 1.17 in the branch name. Is this intended for the 1.17 release? |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
/approve cancel |
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
approved
|
@neolit123 thanks! |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
/approve |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
/approve cancel |
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
approved
k8s-ci-robot
added
size/XXL
k8s-ci-robot
added
size/XS
|
@neolit123 Can you base this change on the |
this change is for older versions of k8s and not only 1.17. |
|
@zparnold
thanks. |
|
/lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jimangel The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
/kind cleanup
/priority important-longterm
fixes kubernetes/kubeadm#1801
/assign @fabriziopandini @rosti