Skip to content

Conversation

@bschimke95
Copy link
Contributor

Backport of #1886 without 6b958c3 because this test does not exist in 1.32. We could consider backporting this along with #1773

@bschimke95 bschimke95 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 15, 2025 12:57
The `--force` flag for `k8s remove-node` did not work for lost nodes
because it required a node to be available to remove it.

This commit ensures that all mentions of the leaving node will be
removed (etcd, microcluster, k8s-dqlite, Kubernetes) and not fail if the
node does not exist already in one of them.
* Adds a section to the troubleshooting page
* Updates the warning in the uninstall tutorial
@bschimke95
Copy link
Contributor Author

Docs check currently broken and disabled in #1919

Copy link
Contributor

@louiseschmidtgen louiseschmidtgen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

If possible, please add the test case for the back-port ensuring this change works in 1.33.

Extend the control-plane clustering tests to verify the (non-)existence
of members in all relevant places (datastore, Kubernetes,
microcluster)

(cherry picked from commit 2515491)
@bschimke95 bschimke95 force-pushed the KU-4295/lost-node-removal-backport-1.33 branch from 62e819f to 308e189 Compare October 24, 2025 14:56
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