Add retries to update calico-rr data in etcd through calicoctl

[marquetemb]

What type of PR is this?

Uncomment only one /kind <> line, hit enter to put that in a new line, and remove leading whitespaces from that line:

/kind api-change

/kind bug

/kind cleanup
/kind design
/kind documentation
/kind failing-test
/kind feature
/kind flake

What this PR does / why we need it:
Fix a race condition configuring router reflector with calicoctl. See #6504
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #6504
Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

[k8s-ci-robot]

Thanks for your pull request. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please follow instructions at https://git.k8s.io/community/CLA.md#the-contributor-license-agreement to sign the CLA.

It may take a couple minutes for the CLA signature to be fully registered; after that, please reply here with a new comment and we'll verify. Thanks.

---

• If you've already signed a CLA, it's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address. Check your existing CLA data and verify that your email is set on your git commits.
• If you signed the CLA as a corporation, please sign in with your organization's credentials at https://identity.linuxfoundation.org/projects/cncf to be authorized.
• If you have done the above and are still having issues with the CLA being reported as unsigned, please log a ticket with the Linux Foundation Helpdesk: https://support.linuxfoundation.org/
• Should you encounter any issues with the Linux Foundation Helpdesk, send a message to the backup e-mail support address at: [email protected]

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.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @marquetemb!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/kubespray 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/kubespray has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @marquetemb. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs 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.

[marquetemb]

/assign @mattymo

[unai-ttxu]

Hi @mattymo!

Can anyone take a look to this PR 😄?

This fixes some spurious errors during installation, which force us to retray it several times in the worst scenario.

Thanks!

[floryut]

/ok-to-test

[floryut]

/assign @Miouge1

[floryut]

Kind of strange way to do this, but afaik there is not a lof of possibilities with Ansible so..
/lgtm

[Miouge1]

This retry loop with block, include_task and rescue looks similar to some of the workarounds proposed in ansible/ansible#46203

Since the first task already has a retry loop would this work without a block all together?

[marquetemb]

This retry loop with block, include_task and rescue looks similar to some of the workarounds proposed in ansible/ansible#46203

Since the first task already has a retry loop would this work without a block all together?

Yes, this feature (loop over block) is a long-term wish for a lot of users of ansible, but for now, we have to deal with it with workarounds.

The block is necessary because you need to ensure that the second task "Calico-rr | Fetch current node object" (i think that you are refering to this when you point to the first task with the loop), and the third task are executed in a row, because the problem is that any change in etcd database between the read (second task) and the update (third task), would change the resourceVersion of etcd and the update will fail (because it has an outdated resourceVersion read it in the second task).

[Miouge1]

I think it would make sense to add a comment and possibly a link to the Ansible issue about loops for blocks. Just for future reference.

[marquetemb]

I think it would make sense to add a comment and possibly a link to the Ansible issue about loops for blocks. Just for future reference.

Done

[EppO]

/lgtm

[Miouge1]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: marquetemb, Miouge1

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:

• OWNERS [Miouge1]

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