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

fix exponential backoff bug in RetryConfigFromDeliverySpec() #4115

Merged

Conversation

travis-minke-sap
Copy link
Contributor

Fixes #4113

Proposed Changes

Rework the exponential backoff calculation to match the advertised algorithm.

Release Note

The default exponential backoff duration now matches the advertised algorithm in the DeliverySpec.BackoffDelay comments.  User action required to evaluate if DeliverySpec.BackoffDelay settings in `Subscription.spec.delivery` remain appropriate.

@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CLA. label Sep 24, 2020
@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Sep 24, 2020
@knative-prow-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @travis-minke-sap! It looks like this is your first PR to knative/eventing 🎉

@knative-prow-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @travis-minke-sap. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a knative member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

Copy link
Member

@mattmoor mattmoor left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Produced via:
gofmt -s -w $(find -path './vendor' -prune -o -path './third_party' -prune -o -name '*.pb.go' -prune -o -type f -name '*.go' -print)
goimports -w $(find -name '*.go' | grep -v vendor | grep -v third_party | grep -v .pb.go | grep -v wire_gen.go)

Copy link
Member

@pierDipi pierDipi left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you backport to 0.17?

/ok-to-test
/lgtm

@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Sep 24, 2020
@knative-prow-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: pierDipi, travis-minke-sap

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@knative-prow-robot knative-prow-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Sep 24, 2020
Copy link
Contributor Author

@travis-minke-sap travis-minke-sap left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you backport to 0.17?

/ok-to-test
/lgtm

Sure - happy to backport it ; ). This is my first knative-eventing PR (outside all the sandbox work) - do I just create another PR against the latest release-0.17 branch or is there more to it ?

@knative-metrics-robot
Copy link

The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
Say /test pull-knative-eventing-go-coverage to re-run this coverage report

File Old Coverage New Coverage Delta
pkg/kncloudevents/message_sender.go Do not exist 44.1%

@pierDipi
Copy link
Member

Yes, just another PR against the release-0.17 branch, similar to this: #4114 (which is related to this PR)

@knative-prow-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@travis-minke-sap: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Rerun command
pull-knative-eventing-go-coverage f470e26 link /test pull-knative-eventing-go-coverage

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CLA. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Incorrect exponential backoff algorithm in RetryConfigFromDeliverySpec()
6 participants