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

Include the return code only if Backend has no ReturnCode #103

Open
wants to merge 15 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sameshai
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@sameshai sameshai changed the title Include the return code only if Backend has no ReturnCode POC : Include the return code only if Backend has no ReturnCode Feb 28, 2025
@sameshai sameshai self-assigned this Mar 3, 2025
@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 3, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.04%]

@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 3, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.07%]

@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 4, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.27%]

@sameshai sameshai force-pushed the errorcode branch 5 times, most recently from 7f286b9 to a65f0eb Compare March 6, 2025 09:14
@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 6, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.27%]

@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 6, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.17%]

@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 6, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.27%]

Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 10, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.27%]

@sameshai sameshai changed the title POC : Include the return code only if Backend has no ReturnCode Include the return code only if Backend has no ReturnCode Mar 10, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@arahamad arahamad 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 please share the errors also in the PR and how this is reflecting in the logs and csi

expVol: nil,
subnetID: "sub-1",
securityGroupID: "kube-fake-cluster-id",
subnetError: nil,
securityGroupError: nil,
libVolumeResponse: nil,
libVolumeAccessPointError: nil,
libVolumeError: providerError.Message{Code: "FailedToPlaceOrder", Description: "Volume creation failed", Type: providerError.Unauthenticated},
libVolumeError: providerError.Message{Code: "FailedToPlaceOrder", Description: "Volume creation failed", Type: providerError.Unauthenticated, RC: 400},
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Unauthenticated error looks to be not matching with error code codes.InvalidArgument

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

IF we are expecting this then we need to match exact error codes and right if else conditions or similar logic. As of now for this phase anything that is not internal is 4xx invalid argument. We can discuss if required.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We are considering 2 generic categories, 5xx server side error and 4xx client is not passing right parameters

@sameshai
Copy link
Member Author

sameshai commented Mar 11, 2025

Can you please share the errors also in the PR and how this is reflecting in the logs and csi

https://github.ibm.com/alchemy-containers/armada-storage/issues/6171#issuecomment-1060167669

Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 11, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.27%]

Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 11, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [74.04%]

Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 11, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [73.94%]

Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 12, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [73.92%]

Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Sameer Shaikh <[email protected]>
@contsto
Copy link

contsto commented Mar 12, 2025

👍 Coverage increased from [%] to [73.88%]

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants