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

LeaderElector's 'stopLeadingHook' runs when leadership was not acquired #3600

Open
greggomann opened this issue Jul 27, 2024 · 2 comments
Open
Labels
lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.

Comments

@greggomann
Copy link

greggomann commented Jul 27, 2024

Describe the bug
The doc string for the LeaderElector's run() method state:

stopLeadingHook called when a LeaderElector client stops leading

However, stopLeadingHook is called both when the client stops leading and when an exception causes the client to exit the acquire loop. In our particular case, the thread executing the acquire loop experienced an InterruptedException which caused this. I think either the docs should be updated to reflect that the hook is called in such cases or the code should be updated to only run the hook when leadership was actually acquired.

From the caller's perspective, I think the latter probably makes more sense. I'd be happy to submit a PR.

Client Version
Present on current tip of master, a86df3a753af9c616f40c18b37ac6ef86921ece9

Kubernetes Version
1.26

Java Version
Java 17

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  • Pass any stopLeadingHook to the LeaderElector's run() method.
  • Cause the acquire loop to throw an exception.
  • Observe the stop leading hook being executed.

Expected behavior
Based on the doc string of the method, I expected the 'stopLeadingHook' to only be executed in cases where the client had actually acquired leadership and its leadership ended.

Server (please complete the following information):

  • OS: Linux
  • Environment: EC2 VM
  • Cloud: AWS
@brendandburns
Copy link
Contributor

Your proposed change makes sense to me. Happy to have a PR (and a unit test) for this fix.

@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Oct 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants