Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

Update default etcd server to 3.4.13 #94287

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 1, 2020
Merged

Update default etcd server to 3.4.13 #94287

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 1, 2020

Conversation

jingyih
Copy link
Contributor

@jingyih jingyih commented Aug 27, 2020 •
edited
Loading

What type of PR is this?
/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
We are updating etcd client version to 3.4.13 in #94141. We also updated the Makefile for building etcd 3.4.13 images in #94260, which triggers automatic build job [1]. This PR updates the default etcd server version to 3.4.13 in our codebase.

[1] https://prow.k8s.io/view/gs/kubernetes-jenkins/logs/post-kubernetes-push-image-etcd/1298979413844561923

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #94141
This version bump picks up etcd-io/etcd#12242 which fixes etcd-io/etcd#12144 and etcd-io/etcd#12148.

Related:
#94102
kubernetes/kubeadm#2256

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Update default etcd server version to 3.4.13

/sig api-machinery
/area etcd

cc @kubernetes/release-engineering @neolit123 @justaugustus @saschagrunert @BenTheElder @wojtek-t @wenjiaswe

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. area/etcd cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Aug 27, 2020
@jingyih
Copy link
Contributor Author

jingyih commented Aug 27, 2020

/hold
Until #94259 is merged.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Aug 27, 2020
@neolit123
Copy link
Member

/milestone v1.20-phase-feature

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.20-phase-feature milestone Aug 27, 2020
@neolit123
Copy link
Member

/approve for kubeadm
thanks @jingyih

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/e2e-test-framework Issues or PRs related to refactoring the kubernetes e2e test framework area/kubeadm labels Aug 27, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested review from cheftako and sttts August 27, 2020 20:14
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider area/test sig/cloud-provider Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cloud Provider. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. labels Aug 27, 2020
@dims
Copy link
Member

dims commented Aug 27, 2020

/retest
/approve

@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member

[sig-api-machinery] Aggregator Should be able to support the 1.17 Sample API Server using the current Aggregator

seems to be failing across jobs

@jingyih
Copy link
Contributor Author

jingyih commented Aug 28, 2020

/retest

@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member

BenTheElder commented Aug 28, 2020 •
edited
Loading

The presence of this single test case failure across 5 presubmits suggests that it's the PR.

@jingyih
Copy link
Contributor Author

jingyih commented Aug 28, 2020 •
edited
Loading

The presence of this single test case failure across 5 presubmits suggests that it's the PR.

Right. As an experiment, I just reverted change to sample apiserver 5df6774. Not sure if / why it causes the test failure.
Edit: It turns out that this is unrelated.

@jingyih jingyih force-pushed the update_etcd_server_3p4p13 branch from 5df6774 to 35042b4 Compare August 28, 2020 12:16
@jingyih jingyih force-pushed the update_etcd_server_3p4p13 branch from 35042b4 to c96b93f Compare August 28, 2020 13:19
@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member

/approve

@liggitt liggitt added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label Aug 29, 2020
@justaugustus justaugustus modified the milestones: v1.20-phase-bug, v1.20 Aug 31, 2020
@fejta-bot
Copy link

/retest
This bot automatically retries jobs that failed/flaked on approved PRs (send feedback to fejta).

Review the full test history for this PR.

Silence the bot with an /lgtm cancel or /hold comment for consistent failures.

@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

wojtek-t commented Sep 1, 2020

/retest

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-kind

@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

wojtek-t commented Sep 1, 2020

/retest

1 similar comment
@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

wojtek-t commented Sep 1, 2020

/retest

@jingyih
Copy link
Contributor Author

jingyih commented Sep 1, 2020

pull-kubernetes-e2e-kind seems to be failing for all PRs?

@liggitt
Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Sep 1, 2020

see kubernetes/test-infra#19080

@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member

The CI infrastructure has changed and the resource allocation to it was reduced 🙄
It's not surprising that kubernetes with less compute and iops is flaky :/

@fejta-bot
Copy link

/retest
This bot automatically retries jobs that failed/flaked on approved PRs (send feedback to fejta).

Review the full test history for this PR.

Silence the bot with an /lgtm cancel or /hold comment for consistent failures.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit b49724d into kubernetes:master Sep 1, 2020
@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

wojtek-t commented Sep 2, 2020

@jingyih @liggitt - we should probably cherrypick back to 1.19, right?

@liggitt
Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Sep 2, 2020 •
edited
Loading

@jingyih @liggitt - we should probably cherrypick back to 1.19, right?

I'm not sure... this seems to be addressing issues in the 3.4.10 server version, which we don't have in 1.19

@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

wojtek-t commented Sep 2, 2020

I'm not sure... this seems to be addressing issues in the 3.4.10 server version, which we don't have in 1.19

Which makes it even more important, as 3.4.9 contains things reported as CVEs:
https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/kubernetes-sig-api-machinery/yKiWnuaGYr0

@neolit123
Copy link
Member

for me, CVE-2020-15112 > CVE-2020-15106
there are a lot of users out there < 1.19 still, so including newer etcd in 1.19, would let them a smoother transition without having to apply a custom etcd version, if they worry about these CVEs.

@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

wojtek-t commented Sep 2, 2020

chatted with @liggitt offline - the problem is that we're still on 3.4.9 in 1.19 branch:
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/release-1.19/build/dependencies.yaml#L77

@jingyih - will you be willing to cherrypick 3.4.13 bump to 1.19 branch

@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Sep 3, 2020
Open
@jingyih
Copy link
Contributor Author

jingyih commented Sep 3, 2020

@wojtek-t Sounds good. I will help with the cherrypick.

@justaugustus
Copy link
Member

Note that the cherry pick deadline for v1.19.1 is tomorrow.
It'd be great to get this in in time for that. :)

@jingyih jingyih mentioned this pull request Sep 4, 2020
Merged
k8s-ci-robot added a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 4, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Merge pull request #94536 from jingyih/automated-cherry-pick-of-#9428…
5f5b46a 
…7-upstream-release-1.19

Automated cherry pick of #94287: Update default etcd server to 3.4.13
@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini mentioned this pull request Dec 14, 2020
Merged
@wenjiaswe wenjiaswe mentioned this pull request Feb 1, 2021
Closed
@CKchen0726
Copy link
Contributor

@jingyih Hi, if I upgrade K8S v1.19.0 to v1.19.4, do I have to upgrade etcd to 3.4.13?

@pacoxu
Copy link
Member

pacoxu commented Feb 24, 2021

https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/release-1.19/cmd/kubeadm/app/constants/constants.go#L438-L440
kubeadm will upgrade etcd if the target cluster version is 1.19~1.21

@jingyih jingyih mentioned this pull request Mar 30, 2021
Merged
@PradeepKumar-15
Copy link

PradeepKumar-15 commented May 17, 2021 •
edited
Loading

@pacoxu Had a quick question and was hoping you could help. We use managed etcd service and its fork from open source etcd project. Based on this info, is there a hard need to upgrade etcd server side from 3.4.2 (version we currently use) to 3.4.9 or 3.4.13 to use K8s 1.19 or 1.20 versions as etcd client side is updated to these versions.
Any information on this would be of great help. Thank you.

@pacoxu
Copy link
Member

pacoxu commented May 18, 2021

From the kubeadm code, the min version is 3.2.18(indicates minimum external etcd version which kubeadm supports) and 3.4.3-0 is the default that kubeadm uses. This is just a suggestion from kubeadm, that you may refer to, to make a decision.
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/v1.18.8/cmd/kubeadm/app/constants/constants.go#L266-L270

For the ETCD release note, you can refer to https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/CHANGELOG-3.2.md.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@cheftako cheftako Awaiting requested review from cheftako

@sttts sttts Awaiting requested review from sttts

Assignees

@liggitt liggitt

@wojtek-t wojtek-t

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/e2e-test-framework Issues or PRs related to refactoring the kubernetes e2e test framework area/etcd area/kubeadm area/provider/gcp Issues or PRs related to gcp provider area/test cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. kind/cleanup Categorizes issue or PR as related to cleaning up code, process, or technical debt. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. sig/cloud-provider Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cloud Provider. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.20
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Update etcd version to 3.4.13 Upgrading from v3.4.9 to v3.4.10 requires manual action