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

IPAM tests cannot be run concurrently #1382

Open
corymhall opened this issue Sep 17, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

IPAM tests cannot be run concurrently #1382

corymhall opened this issue Sep 17, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
kind/bug Some behavior is incorrect or out of spec kind/engineering Work that is not visible to an external user

Comments

@corymhall
Copy link
Contributor

What happened?

It looks like we have a limit of 1 ipam existing at a time, which means that we can only run that test with a concurrency of 1 across all workflow runs.

* creating IPAM: operation error EC2: CreateIpam, https response error StatusCode: 400, RequestID: 6fbeea5e-d315-4d99-bde7-9f8a2dac7574, api error ResourceLimitExceeded: You've reached the limit for ipams. You have created 1 ipams and you are limited to 1.
*

We could:

  • Run this test in a separate job with a concurrency of 1 across all workflow runs
  • Run this workflow only during the main workflow after PRs have been merged

Example

N/A

Output of pulumi about

N/A

Additional context

No response

Contributing

Vote on this issue by adding a 👍 reaction.
To contribute a fix for this issue, leave a comment (and link to your pull request, if you've opened one already).

@corymhall corymhall added kind/bug Some behavior is incorrect or out of spec needs-triage Needs attention from the triage team kind/engineering Work that is not visible to an external user and removed needs-triage Needs attention from the triage team labels Sep 17, 2024
@flostadler
Copy link
Contributor

flostadler commented Sep 18, 2024

What if we set up the IPAM & pool before the test (and just use it if it already exists). I think that way we should get around those limitations

@corymhall
Copy link
Contributor Author

That's a good idea. We originally considered just creating a permanent one and using that since they are free, but decided not to because it didn't affect the test speed. The concurrency limitation makes it worth it I think.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/bug Some behavior is incorrect or out of spec kind/engineering Work that is not visible to an external user
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants