Skip to content

Use Delete() instead of DeleteLabelValues() for etcd metrics #133412

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 7, 2025

Conversation

richabanker
Copy link
Contributor

@richabanker richabanker commented Aug 7, 2025

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Replaces use of DeleteLabelValues() with Delete() for etcd metrics since Delete() has proper handling of unregistered metrics.

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

Fixes #133405

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Fixes an issue that caused kube-apiserver to panic in 1.34.0-rc.0

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:


@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Aug 7, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Please note that we're already in Test Freeze for the release-1.34 branch. This means every merged PR will be automatically fast-forwarded via the periodic ci-fast-forward job to the release branch of the upcoming v1.34.0 release.

Fast forwards are scheduled to happen every 6 hours, whereas the most recent run was: Thu Aug 7 03:00:08 UTC 2025.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Aug 7, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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-sigs/prow repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. area/apiserver sig/api-machinery Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG API Machinery. sig/etcd Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Etcd. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Aug 7, 2025
@serathius
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

@serathius
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 7, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 767f6064fc8073e4424333e88af04938d03022c9

@serathius
Copy link
Contributor

We don't have approval without @logicalhan :(

/cc @jpbetz

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot requested a review from jpbetz August 7, 2025 08:47
@pacoxu
Copy link
Member

pacoxu commented Aug 7, 2025

cc @kubernetes/release-team-leads @Vyom-Yadav

@Vyom-Yadav
Copy link
Member

/milestone v1.34

@liggitt
Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Aug 7, 2025

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: liggitt, richabanker

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. and removed release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. labels Aug 7, 2025
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 8ac9a3c into kubernetes:master Aug 7, 2025
13 checks passed
@serathius
Copy link
Contributor

/cherry-pick release-1.34

@serathius
Copy link
Contributor

No cherry-pick bot :( ?

@liggitt
Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Aug 7, 2025

no cherry-pick needed, release-1.34 is still auto-fastforwarding to master

once we cut 1.34.0, then cherry picks are required (and correct, there is no cherry-pick bot in k/k)

@serathius
Copy link
Contributor

serathius commented Aug 7, 2025

Makes sense, I incorrectly assumed branch is cut after first RC.

@BenTheElder
Copy link
Member

Makes sense, I incorrectly assumed branch is cut after first RC.

The branch is but I (and maybe you?) forgot that it's still just fast-forwarded from master periodically until code freeze is lifted.

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. area/apiserver cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. 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. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/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/etcd Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Etcd. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Segfault on e2e tests after 1.34 RC
7 participants