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

Update SkyDNS version #5238

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 11, 2015
Merged

Update SkyDNS version #5238

merged 1 commit into from
Mar 11, 2015

Conversation

Komnomnomnom
Copy link
Contributor

I had some trouble with the kubernetes docker image for SkyDNS being outdated. In my experience the version in kubernetes/skydns:2014-12-23-001 will not behave correctly if it manages to startup before etcd, for details see skynetservices/skydns#142

Updating to SkyDNS latest fixes this.

@Komnomnomnom
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm running kubernetes on CoreOS in a vagrant cluster on my local machine.

@thockin
Copy link
Member

thockin commented Mar 10, 2015

@rsokolowski can you rebuild our custom ultra-minimal skydns container too?

@@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ desiredState:
"-domain={{ pillar['dns_domain'] }}",
]
- name: skydns
image: kubernetes/skydns:2014-12-23-001
image: skynetservices/skydns:latest
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We should be using a new versioned image rather than tracking latest.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

And, unless they have fixed the SkyDNS container to not be 600 MB, we should keep using our own build. @bketelsen have you guys "fixed" that yet?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Agreed, but I didn't see any tagged versions in the SkyDns docker repo and I wasn't aware of the size issue. Happy to update this if someone creates an updated, tagged image.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please use kubernetes/skydns:2015-03-11-001 instead.

@thockin
Copy link
Member

thockin commented Mar 11, 2015

@rsokolowski until you say stop, I'm going to send all these DNS related issues your way :)

@piosz
Copy link
Member

piosz commented Mar 11, 2015

I can do it.

Done.

@piosz piosz assigned piosz and unassigned rsokolowski Mar 11, 2015
I had some trouble with the kubernetes docker image for SkyDNS being outdated. In my experience the version in `kubernetes/skydns:2014-12-23-001` will not behave correctly if it manages to startup before etcd, for details see skynetservices/skydns#142

 Updating to SkyDNS latest fixes this.
@Komnomnomnom
Copy link
Contributor Author

Image updated to kubernetes/skydns:2015-03-11-001, thanks @piosz ! Tested it out too and it works for me.

@piosz
Copy link
Member

piosz commented Mar 11, 2015

LGTM. Will merge during merge hours.

@piosz piosz added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 11, 2015
piosz added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 11, 2015
@piosz piosz merged commit 4b06155 into kubernetes:master Mar 11, 2015
@Komnomnomnom Komnomnomnom deleted the patch-1 branch March 11, 2015 15:24
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants