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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Bump GCE ContainerVM to container-v1-3-v20160517 (Docker 1.11.1) #25843

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
May 19, 2016
Merged

Bump GCE ContainerVM to container-v1-3-v20160517 (Docker 1.11.1) #25843

merged 1 commit into from
May 19, 2016
+2 −2

Conversation

zmerlynn
Copy link
Member

Analytics

@zmerlynn zmerlynn added the sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. label May 18, 2016
@zmerlynn
Copy link
Member Author

We're waiting on http://kubekins.dls.corp.google.com/job/kubernetes-e2e-gce-container-vm/ to go green first (which means we need a fix to a racy test first).

@k8s-github-robot k8s-github-robot added size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. release-note-label-needed labels May 18, 2016
@zmerlynn
Copy link
Member Author

cc @kubernetes/goog-node @kubernetes/goog-image

@zmerlynn zmerlynn added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. and removed release-note-label-needed labels May 18, 2016
@zmerlynn zmerlynn added this to the v1.3 milestone May 18, 2016
@dchen1107
Copy link
Member

LGTM

cc/ @derekwaynecarr FYI: This help us to enable more testing, doesn't mean it passed all validation tests yet.

@dchen1107 dchen1107 added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 19, 2016
@k8s-bot
Copy link

k8s-bot commented May 19, 2016

GCE e2e build/test passed for commit 4d551d6.

@lavalamp
Copy link
Member

manual merge.

@lavalamp lavalamp merged commit 1a64ae8 into kubernetes:master May 19, 2016
@dchen1107
Copy link
Member

#23397 & #25893

This was referenced May 20, 2016
Closed
Merged
@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

It seems that this PR completely broke large kubemarks. But the real problem is that we was able to start only ~60pods on a single node. Which is definitely a big problem.

I reverted this PR in #25951

@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

@k8s-oncall - FYI ^^

@wojtek-t
Copy link
Member

This means that there is some incompatibiliy between Docker 1.9 and 1.11, which we need to be explicit about if we want that.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers
No reviews
Assignees

@dchen1107 dchen1107

Labels
lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/node Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Node. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.3
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
7 participants
@zmerlynn @dchen1107 @k8s-bot @lavalamp @wojtek-t @googlebot @k8s-github-robot