mirror of
https://github.com/cozystack/cozystack.git
synced 2026-11-08 21:14:56 +09:00
Aleksei Sviridkin
92ec49e64e
<!-- Thank you for making a contribution! Here are some tips for you: - Use Conventional Commits for the PR title: `type(scope): description` - Types: feat, fix, docs, style, refactor, perf, test, build, ci, chore - Scopes are not an exhaustive list — pick the most specific scope for the change and extend the list when a genuinely new area appears. Examples: - System components: dashboard, platform, operator, cilium, kube-ovn, linstor, fluxcd, cluster-api - Managed apps: postgres, mariadb, redis, kafka, clickhouse, virtual-machine, kubernetes - Development and maintenance: api, hack, tests, ci, docs, maintenance - Breaking changes: append `!` after type/scope (`feat(api)!: ...`) or add a `BREAKING CHANGE:` footer - If it's a work in progress, consider creating this PR as a draft. - Don't hesistate to ask for opinion and review in the community chats, even if it's still a draft. - Add the label `backport` if it's a bugfix that needs to be backported to a previous version. --> ## What this PR does The tenant chart renders monitoring and gateway with no install strategy, so they get Flux's default, and install remediation is an uninstall in every case Flux offers. Neither sets `spec.uninstall.disableHooks`, which defaults to false. So a release that missed nothing but a readiness budget gets uninstalled, and the app chart's `post-delete` cleanup Job runs against it. Those Jobs delete on purpose, and they are right to. The monitoring one removes PVCs labelled `apps.cozystack.io/application.name=<release>-system`. That label is not incidental either: the metrics and logs claim templates stamp it so the operator copies it onto the storage PVCs, and the Job selects on it to stay release-scoped. Both ends were built to meet. The result is that a slow first install deletes the tenant's metrics and logs, and nothing reconstructs them. The gateway Job deletes the `cozystack-acme-account` Secret. That key regenerates, so this one costs no data. It costs a re-registration against the ACME provider, and repeated cycles run into its rate limits, which can hold certificate issuance for the tenant down for hours. Smaller stake, same mechanism, and the two are not one class: only one of them owns storage. `RetryOnFailure` keeps the manifests applied and retries the failed release, so no uninstall happens and neither Job runs. Both actions carry the strategy because the controller performs that retry as an upgrade, so with install alone the retry's own failure falls through to upgrade remediation. The remediation blocks stay: an absent release consults install, an out-of-sync one consults upgrade, both by retry count rather than by strategy. Two things are traded away. A real upgrade failure now retries instead of rolling back, which gives up no stable safety net, since with `retries: -1` the default strategy was already rolling back and re-upgrading without end. And the uninstall was the only automatic clean slate, so an install wedged on a bad resource state retries against that state until an operator removes the release. For a release that owns data that is the right exchange. This removes the consequence rather than the trigger, and for monitoring the trigger is worth naming separately: the parent HelmRelease here waits `10m`, while the child `monitoring-system` release sets `15m` deliberately, with a comment explaining that 10m is too short for the OIDC users-Job inside its `activeDeadlineSeconds: 900`. The parent's wait covers the child, so the parent can fail while the child is behaving exactly as designed. That mismatch is untouched here and wants its own change. The chart's etcd and seaweedfs releases lose storage the same way and are outside this change. Beyond those four, computeplane, ingress and info stay on the default strategy, but their charts ship no destructive `post-delete` hook, so remediation costs them a wasteful teardown rather than data. Same shape as #3552 and #3581. Relates to #3624. ### Screenshots <!-- REQUIRED for UI changes: attach screenshots or screen recordings demonstrating the visual impact of your changes. PRs with UI changes without screenshots will not be merged. --> ### Downstream repositories <!-- Cozystack is upstream for repositories that are NOT kept in sync with it automatically, and nothing in CI compares the two sides, so a change here can break them silently. Which change forces what, and which file to touch, is the trigger map in docs/agents/contributing.md under "Downstream Repositories". Walk it before you tick anything. IF YOU ARE AN AI AGENT OR AN LLM, THIS IS PART OF THE TASK, NOT A FORM TO FILL IN: 1. Walk the trigger map against the actual diff of this PR, file by file. Do not decide from the PR title or from your memory of what you changed. 2. For every repository you tick, open the follow-up PR there and link it on the same line. A ticked box with no link claims work that does not exist, which is worse than an empty box. Search that repository for an open PR or issue covering it first, and link that instead of filing a duplicate. 3. When the follow-up is out of scope, or needs a decision that is not yours to make, open an issue in that repository instead, link that, and say so in the PR body. Do not push a speculative PR into another repository just to fill a line here. 4. Do not tick "No downstream repository is affected" to make the checklist go away. If you are unsure, leave every box empty and say so in the PR body, so a human decides. --> - [x] No downstream repository is affected by this change - [ ] [cozystack/website](https://github.com/cozystack/website) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/terraform-provider-cozystack](https://github.com/cozystack/terraform-provider-cozystack) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/ansible-cozystack](https://github.com/cozystack/ansible-cozystack) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/ccp](https://github.com/cozystack/ccp) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/talm](https://github.com/cozystack/talm) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/cozyhr](https://github.com/cozystack/cozyhr) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/cozy-proxy](https://github.com/cozystack/cozy-proxy) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/cozystack-telemetry-server](https://github.com/cozystack/cozystack-telemetry-server) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/external-apps-example](https://github.com/cozystack/external-apps-example) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/examples](https://github.com/cozystack/examples) - follow-up: ### Release note <!-- Write a release note: - Explain what has changed internally and for users. - Start with the same `type(scope):` prefix as in the PR title - Follow the guidelines at https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/guide/release-notes.md. --> ```release-note fix(tenant): retry a failed monitoring or gateway install instead of uninstalling the release, so a slow first install no longer runs the cleanup hooks that delete the tenant's metrics and logs volumes or its ACME account key ``` <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit * **Reliability Improvements** * Monitoring and gateway deployments now automatically retry failed installs and upgrades every 30 seconds. * Existing unlimited remediation retries remain available, improving recovery from deployment issues. * **Validation** * Added automated coverage to verify retry behavior for both monitoring and gateway deployments. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->