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

Bug 2249462: Fencing takes more time than expected #179

Conversation

ELENAGER
Copy link

Fencing takes more time than expected

Signed-off-by: Elena Gershkovich [email protected]
(cherry picked from commit e544937)

Signed-off-by: Elena Gershkovich <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit e544937)
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 25, 2024

@ELENAGER: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2249462, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (ODF 4.15.0) matches configured target release for branch (ODF 4.15.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @keesturam

In response to this:

Bug 2249462: Fencing takes more time than expected

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/test-infra repository.

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 25, 2024

@openshift-ci[bot]: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: keesturam.

Note that only red-hat-storage members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

In response to this:

@ELENAGER: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2249462, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug
  • bug is open, matching expected state (open)
  • bug target release (ODF 4.15.0) matches configured target release for branch (ODF 4.15.0)
  • bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @keesturam

In response to this:

Bug 2249462: Fencing takes more time than expected

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/test-infra repository.

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/test-infra repository.

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 25, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ELENAGER, ShyamsundarR

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

@ShyamsundarR ShyamsundarR merged commit 90e3ce1 into red-hat-storage:release-4.15 Jan 25, 2024
12 of 13 checks passed
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Jan 25, 2024

@ELENAGER: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

Bugzilla bug 2249462 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

Bug 2249462: Fencing takes more time than expected

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/test-infra repository.

@ELENAGER ELENAGER deleted the bug_2249462_long_fencing_backport branch February 22, 2024 12:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants