Skip to content

fix: remove unstable selector labels in mssql and octopus statefulsets#540

Open
liam-mackie wants to merge 5 commits intomainfrom
lm/fix-sts-dynamic-selectors
Open

fix: remove unstable selector labels in mssql and octopus statefulsets#540
liam-mackie wants to merge 5 commits intomainfrom
lm/fix-sts-dynamic-selectors

Conversation

@liam-mackie
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

No description provided.

@changeset-bot
Copy link
Copy Markdown

changeset-bot Bot commented Apr 16, 2026

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: e0eb40e

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 1 package
Name Type
octopus-deploy Minor

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

{{- end }}
containers:
- name: pre-upgrade
image: bitnami/kubectl:latest
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Wouldnt it be safer to use a specific tag rather than :latest?

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

looks like latest still better.

bitnami uses sha for tag names, which not readable and also the oldest image in registry 2 was created months ago. Maybe they have some retention.

"helm.sh/hook": pre-upgrade
"helm.sh/hook-weight": "-5"
"helm.sh/hook-delete-policy": before-hook-creation,hook-succeeded
rules:
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I would add a way to disable this hook (and the extra role/rolebinding/service account) since once the user upgrades and all the stateful sets are recreated with the correct labels, there is no longer need to run the hook.

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what default behaviour u suggest?

  • enabled: false - that makes things inconvenient, as requires user to read docs once meet issue and we don't know from which version to which they gonna update.

  • enabled: true - I guess in most cases users also won't bother about having this extra value

@liam-mackie liam-mackie marked this pull request as ready for review May 6, 2026 08:31
@liam-mackie liam-mackie requested review from a team as code owners May 6, 2026 08:31
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants