Skip to content

chore: use fork of multicluster-runtime for coordinator fix - #320

Open
scotwells wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/multicluster-runtime-fork-interim
Open

chore: use fork of multicluster-runtime for coordinator fix#320
scotwells wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
chore/multicluster-runtime-fork-interim

Conversation

@scotwells

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Summary

Interim fix for #319: sigs.k8s.io/multicluster-runtime's Coordinator doesn't gate Manager.GetCluster or reconcile dispatch by cluster ownership, so a replica can act on a project's resources it was never granted ownership of by the sharded coordinator, even with a correctly-held fence Lease. This was reproduced directly against a real environment (real Milo control plane, real per-project storage isolation, 3 sharded replicas): with a project's fence Lease held by exactly one replica, all three replicas still reconciled the same object.

The fix belongs in the upstream library. We've implemented and validated it in a fork (datum-cloud/multicluster-runtime, branch fix/coordinator-ownership-gate): adds Coordinator.Owns(), gates Manager.GetCluster on it, and skips reconcile dispatch for non-owned clusters. Both mechanisms are enabled by default, so this is a pure dependency swap — no application code changes.

This PR points go.mod at that fork via a replace directive as an interim measure until the fix is proposed and accepted upstream, at which point this should be reverted in favor of a normal version bump.

Test plan

sigs.k8s.io/multicluster-runtime's Coordinator does not gate
Manager.GetCluster or reconcile dispatch by cluster ownership, so a
replica can act on a project's resources it was never granted
ownership of by the sharded coordinator. This is the root cause of
issue #319.

Point at datum-cloud/multicluster-runtime@fix/coordinator-ownership-gate,
which adds Coordinator.Owns(), gates GetCluster on it, and skips
reconcile dispatch for non-owned clusters, until the fix is accepted
upstream. No application code changes are needed: both mechanisms are
enabled by default.

Refs #319
@scotwells
scotwells marked this pull request as ready for review July 24, 2026 17:33
@scotwells
scotwells requested review from a team and mattdjenkinson July 24, 2026 21:59
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.

2 participants