OCPBUGS-70168: Increase size of /var/ostreecontainer mount

[zaneb]

Evidently on PPC64LE we need about 200MiB more space than a 4GiB volume
can contain, despite the image we're pulling being only about 1.4GB.
It's not clear why the system repo is (presumably) taking up so much
space, but a 5GiB volume should be enough to contain it.

Since a tmpfs only allocates RAM for space that is actually used, it
should be safe to increase the allocation. If this causes us to actually
run out of RAM, we will encounter that problem later (it may, however,
be more difficult to debug).

[openshift-ci-robot]

@zaneb: An error was encountered searching for bug OCPBUGS-70168 on the Jira server at https://issues.redhat.com/. No known errors were detected, please see the full error message for details.

Full error message.

invalid character '<' looking for beginning of value: file already closed

Please contact an administrator to resolve this issue, then request a bug refresh with /jira refresh.

Details

In response to this:

Evidently on PPC64LE we need about 200MiB more space than a 4GiB volume
can contain, despite the image we're pulling being only about 1.4GB.
It's not clear why the system repo is (presumably) taking up so much
space, but a 5GiB volume should be enough to contain it.

Since a tmpfs only allocates RAM for space that is actually used, it
should be safe to increase the allocation. If this causes us to actually
run out of RAM, we will encounter that problem later (it may, however,
be more difficult to debug).

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[tthvo]

/jira refresh

[openshift-ci-robot]

@tthvo: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-70168, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set

Comment /jira refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Jira bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker.

Details

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[tthvo]

/jira refresh

[openshift-ci-robot]

@tthvo: This pull request references Jira Issue OCPBUGS-70168, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target version (4.22.0) matches configured target version for branch (4.22.0)
• bug is in the state New, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @gpei

Details

In response to this:

/jira refresh

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[prb112]

/lgtm

And thank you

[zaneb]

/cherry-pick release-4.21

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

@zaneb: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-4.21 in a new PR and assign it to you.

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.21

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-sigs/prow repository.

[zaneb]

/label acknowledge-critical-fixes-only

[bfournie]

/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bfournie, prb112

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

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [bfournie]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[prb112]

Hey @zaneb we've tested this with a manual change. Since prow doesn't generate ppc64le images, do we want to mark /verified qe manual test, and verify in a subsequent build? Thank you for the guidance, Paul

[prb112]

/verified by @hemali Gujarathi from Power QE

[openshift-ci-robot]

@prb112: This PR has been marked as verified by @Hemali Gujarathi from Power QE.

Details

In response to this:

/verified by @hemali Gujarathi from Power QE

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[tthvo]

/retest-required

[openshift-ci]

@zaneb: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

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-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@zaneb: Jira Issue Verification Checks: Jira Issue OCPBUGS-70168
✔️ This pull request was pre-merge verified.
✔️ All associated pull requests have merged.
✔️ All associated, merged pull requests were pre-merge verified.

Jira Issue OCPBUGS-70168 has been moved to the MODIFIED state and will move to the VERIFIED state when the change is available in an accepted nightly payload. 🕓

Details

In response to this:

Evidently on PPC64LE we need about 200MiB more space than a 4GiB volume
can contain, despite the image we're pulling being only about 1.4GB.
It's not clear why the system repo is (presumably) taking up so much
space, but a 5GiB volume should be enough to contain it.

Since a tmpfs only allocates RAM for space that is actually used, it
should be safe to increase the allocation. If this causes us to actually
run out of RAM, we will encounter that problem later (it may, however,
be more difficult to debug).

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

@zaneb: new pull request created: #10346

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-4.21

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-sigs/prow repository.