Add status reporting to EtcdCluster by GunaKKIBM · Pull Request #350 · etcd-io/etcd-operator

GunaKKIBM · 2026-05-20T03:38:15Z

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-05-20T03:38:25Z

Hi @GunaKKIBM. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a etcd-io member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work.

Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

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.

ahrtr · 2026-05-26T18:48:59Z

/ok-to-test

ahrtr · 2026-05-26T18:50:43Z

please resolve the workflow failures.

ahrtr · 2026-05-27T12:11:05Z

 	}

-	return r.reconcileClusterState(ctx, state)
+	result, err := r.reconcileClusterState(ctx, state)


please use a deferred function at line 89, so that we don't need to call r.updateStatus in multiple places.

Updated. I actually moved it to the beginning of the function, because it should ideally be called even after fetchAndValidate function exits.

ahrtr · 2026-05-27T12:11:33Z

+		quorum := (len(s.memberListResp.Members) / 2) + 1
+		if healthyCount >= quorum {


We don't need to do the math ourselves. We just need to issue an lineralibity read, the etcd cluster is still functional as long as we get a response from any member.

We need enhance the health check.

Let's just keep it as it's for now, and consider improvement in followup PRs, thx

#357 - created this issue to take this up in a separate PR

ahrtr · 2026-05-27T12:12:07Z

+	// Update or append conditions
+	meta.SetStatusCondition(&s.cluster.Status.Conditions, availableCondition)
+	meta.SetStatusCondition(&s.cluster.Status.Conditions, progressingCondition)
+	meta.SetStatusCondition(&s.cluster.Status.Conditions, degradedCondition)


questions: do it mean that we always have three conditions?

Yes. This works like a deployment or any other k8s controller's status. For example, here's two examples of a deployment, one successful and one failed

Successful

status: availableReplicas: 2 conditions: - lastTransitionTime: "2026-06-06T06:28:43Z" lastUpdateTime: "2026-06-06T06:28:43Z" message: Deployment has minimum availability. reason: MinimumReplicasAvailable status: "True" type: Available - lastTransitionTime: "2026-06-06T06:28:31Z" lastUpdateTime: "2026-06-06T06:28:43Z" message: ReplicaSet "nginx-deployment-6f9664446b" has successfully progressed. reason: NewReplicaSetAvailable status: "True" type: Progressing observedGeneration: 1 readyReplicas: 2 replicas: 2 updatedReplicas: 2

Failed:

status: conditions: - lastTransitionTime: "2026-06-06T06:30:09Z" lastUpdateTime: "2026-06-06T06:30:09Z" message: Deployment does not have minimum availability. reason: MinimumReplicasUnavailable status: "False" type: Available - lastTransitionTime: "2026-06-06T06:40:10Z" lastUpdateTime: "2026-06-06T06:40:10Z" message: ReplicaSet "failing-nginx-deployment-8644746d4f" has timed out progressing. reason: ProgressDeadlineExceeded status: "False" type: Progressing observedGeneration: 1 replicas: 2 unavailableReplicas: 2 updatedReplicas: 2

Thanks for the info.

It seems there is no Degraded condition?

It is upto us to add different types of conditions, the type in the condition is of type string. I added one more and called it Degraded (if one or more members is not healthy). We can rename it.

I can check other K8S resources or code to see what are other preferable naming conventions

Thank you!

ivanvc

I left a minor suggestion regarding the message labels.

/cc @jberkus for an agreement on how to display them, as he has more documentation experience.

ahrtr · 2026-06-03T08:33:38Z

@GunaKKIBM pls resolve the minor changes so that we can merge this PR. thx

GunaKKIBM · 2026-06-03T16:04:55Z

@ahrtr . I will be updating this by tomorrow, along with test results for sure. Sorry about the delay.
Thanks!

ahrtr · 2026-06-03T16:24:24Z

pls squash the commits, thx

jberkus · 2026-06-03T21:29:55Z

I left a minor suggestion regarding the message labels.

/cc @jberkus for an agreement on how to display them, as he has more documentation experience.

Seems fine either way from a docs perspective. What's there now is OK.

GunaKKIBM · 2026-06-06T07:38:52Z

Here's how the status looks like when the etcd cluster is deployed

status:
  conditions:
  - lastTransitionTime: "2026-06-06T07:06:52Z"
    message: Etcd cluster has 3/3 healthy members with quorum
    observedGeneration: 1
    reason: ClusterAvailable
    status: "True"
    type: Available
  - lastTransitionTime: "2026-06-06T07:06:52Z"
    message: Etcd cluster is stable
    observedGeneration: 1
    reason: ClusterStable
    status: "False"
    type: Progressing
  - lastTransitionTime: "2026-06-06T07:06:37Z"
    message: All etcd members are healthy
    observedGeneration: 1
    reason: ClusterHealthy
    status: "False"
    type: Degraded
  currentReplicas: 3
  currentVersion: 3.5.21
  leaderID: 41f5beba5f42189a
  memberCount: 3
  members:
  - id: 41f5beba5f42189a
    isHealthy: true
    isLeader: true
    name: etcdcluster-sample-0
    version: 3.5.21
  - id: a2ec1c51b36711d8
    isHealthy: true
    name: etcdcluster-sample-1
    version: 3.5.21
  - id: b8bce8ddff0f6f4f
    isHealthy: true
    name: etcdcluster-sample-2
    version: 3.5.21
  observedGeneration: 1
  readyReplicas: 3

GunaKKIBM · 2026-06-06T07:49:24Z

During further testing, I see an issue, rather than fixing it here. I have created a bug
#358, will pick it up in a different PR

GunaKKIBM · 2026-06-06T07:49:46Z

@ahrtr @ivanvc . Please take a look now. Thank you!

ahrtr

Nice work!

cc @ivanvc do you have any further comment on this PR?

ahrtr · 2026-06-06T10:36:44Z

+		}
+	}()
+
 	state, res, err := r.fetchAndValidateState(ctx, req)


The state here is a new variable. It won't update the state defined above (line 85)

That's a great catch. Thank you very much. I have declared the variables separately and tested these changes once again.
Please let me know if that looks good. Thanks!

GunaKKIBM · 2026-06-10T01:18:33Z

@ahrtr
@ivanvc
May I know if this PR is good to be merged?

ahrtr · 2026-06-10T09:32:23Z

@ahrtr @ivanvc May I know if this PR is good to be merged?

It should be good to merge. @ivanvc will take a second look before we merge it.

ivanvc

LGTM. Ideally, the dependency bump should be in a different commit, unless it's absolutely required by the code change. Otherwise, it looks good and isn't a blocker. Thanks, @GunaKKIBM

k8s-ci-robot · 2026-06-10T19:12:24Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ahrtr, GunaKKIBM, ivanvc

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~OWNERS~~ [ahrtr,ivanvc]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

ivanvc · 2026-06-10T19:12:53Z

@GunaKKIBM, please resolve the conflicts with go.mod/go.sum. After that, we should merge. Thanks :)

Signed-off-by: Guna K Kambalimath <Guna.Kambalimath@ibm.com>

GunaKKIBM · 2026-06-14T18:16:32Z

@ahrtr @ivanvc
I have updated the PR. Rebased with main branch. please merge! Thank you!

Signed-off-by: Guna K Kambalimath <Guna.Kambalimath@ibm.com> Signed-off-by: Valen Mascarenhas <valen.mascarenhas@ibm.com>

k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress label May 20, 2026

k8s-ci-robot added needs-ok-to-test size/L labels May 20, 2026

GunaKKIBM marked this pull request as ready for review May 26, 2026 18:44

k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress label May 26, 2026

ivanvc requested review from ahrtr and ivanvc May 26, 2026 18:45

k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test and removed needs-ok-to-test labels May 26, 2026

GunaKKIBM force-pushed the Status-report branch 2 times, most recently from c98b771 to 6654687 Compare May 27, 2026 04:01

ahrtr reviewed May 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

ivanvc reviewed May 27, 2026

View reviewed changes

GunaKKIBM force-pushed the Status-report branch from 6cdef88 to af82a3c Compare June 6, 2026 06:40

GunaKKIBM mentioned this pull request Jun 6, 2026

Refactoring and incremental changes to Etcd Cluster Status reporting #357

Open

ahrtr approved these changes Jun 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

k8s-ci-robot added the approved label Jun 6, 2026

GunaKKIBM force-pushed the Status-report branch from af82a3c to 63872e8 Compare June 6, 2026 10:04

ahrtr reviewed Jun 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

GunaKKIBM force-pushed the Status-report branch from 63872e8 to e370722 Compare June 6, 2026 10:50

ivanvc self-requested a review June 9, 2026 18:16

ivanvc approved these changes Jun 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

GunaKKIBM force-pushed the Status-report branch from 2417a86 to 50ab86c Compare June 14, 2026 05:50

k8s-ci-robot added size/XL and removed size/L labels Jun 14, 2026

GunaKKIBM force-pushed the Status-report branch from 50ab86c to 2417a86 Compare June 14, 2026 05:54

k8s-ci-robot added size/L and removed size/XL labels Jun 14, 2026

Add status reporting to EtcdCluster

8d66b9a

Signed-off-by: Guna K Kambalimath <Guna.Kambalimath@ibm.com>

GunaKKIBM force-pushed the Status-report branch from 2417a86 to 8d66b9a Compare June 14, 2026 06:11

ahrtr merged commit ddb834e into etcd-io:main Jun 14, 2026
5 checks passed

		quorum := (len(s.memberListResp.Members) / 2) + 1
		if healthyCount >= quorum {

Conversation

GunaKKIBM commented May 20, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented May 20, 2026

Uh oh!

ahrtr commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

ahrtr commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GunaKKIBM Jun 6, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

ivanvc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

ahrtr commented Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

GunaKKIBM commented Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

ahrtr commented Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

jberkus commented Jun 3, 2026

Uh oh!

GunaKKIBM commented Jun 6, 2026

Uh oh!

GunaKKIBM commented Jun 6, 2026

Uh oh!

GunaKKIBM commented Jun 6, 2026

Uh oh!

ahrtr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

GunaKKIBM commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

ahrtr commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

ivanvc left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

k8s-ci-robot commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

ivanvc commented Jun 10, 2026

Uh oh!

GunaKKIBM commented Jun 14, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

GunaKKIBM commented May 20, 2026 •

edited

Loading

GunaKKIBM Jun 6, 2026 •

edited

Loading