Skip to content

K8SPG-1017 leaf cert function needs to check whether the existing secret is already managed by internal PKI before switching to cert-manager#1578

Open
gkech wants to merge 7 commits intomainfrom
K8SPG-1017
Open

K8SPG-1017 leaf cert function needs to check whether the existing secret is already managed by internal PKI before switching to cert-manager#1578
gkech wants to merge 7 commits intomainfrom
K8SPG-1017

Conversation

@gkech
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gkech gkech commented May 4, 2026

CHANGE DESCRIPTION

Problem:

Each leaf cert function needs to check whether the existing secret is already managed by internal PKI before switching to cert-manager. If the root CA secret lacks the cert-manager.io/certificate-name annotation, all leaf certs should stay on internal PKI regardless of whether cert-manager is installed.

Cause:
Short explanation of the root cause of the issue if applicable.

Solution:
Short explanation of the solution we are providing with this PR.

CHECKLIST

Jira

  • Is the Jira ticket created and referenced properly?
  • Does the Jira ticket have the proper statuses for documentation (Needs Doc) and QA (Needs QA)?
  • Does the Jira ticket link to the proper milestone (Fix Version field)?

Tests

  • Is an E2E test/test case added for the new feature/change?
  • Are unit tests added where appropriate?

Config/Logging/Testability

  • Are all needed new/changed options added to default YAML files?
  • Are all needed new/changed options added to the Helm Chart?
  • Did we add proper logging messages for operator actions?
  • Did we ensure compatibility with the previous version or cluster upgrade process?
  • Does the change support oldest and newest supported PG version?
  • Does the change support oldest and newest supported Kubernetes version?

…ret is already managed by internal PKI before switching to cert-manager
@gkech gkech marked this pull request as ready for review May 4, 2026 15:19
err = r.Client.Get(ctx, client.ObjectKeyFromObject(rootSecret), rootSecret)
if err != nil {
if k8serrors.IsNotFound(err) {
return true, nil
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should we really return true here?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There's no pre-existing internally-managed secret to conflict with. Since cert-manager is available and no secret has been created yet, it's safe to let cert-manager create and manage the root CA from scratch. That's the idea.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

@hors hors left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we have a plan to add e2e test?

@gkech
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

gkech commented May 5, 2026

Do we have a plan to add e2e test?

We are about to add an improvement. The issue was that we needed to refactor the flow on the existing test because initially the cluster should start without cert-manager installed, then make assertions, then install cert-manager and ensure that nothing happens. And then destroy it and recreate it while cert-manager is installed.

…i certs and cert manager is installed afterwards
@gkech gkech requested review from egegunes and hors May 5, 2026 13:43
@gkech
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

gkech commented May 5, 2026

Screenshot 2026-05-05 at 4 42 37 PM

@JNKPercona
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Test Name Result Time
backup-enable-disable passed 00:00:00
builtin-extensions passed 00:00:00
cert-manager-tls failure 00:02:20
custom-envs passed 00:00:00
custom-extensions passed 00:00:00
custom-tls passed 00:00:00
database-init-sql passed 00:00:00
demand-backup passed 00:00:00
demand-backup-offline-snapshot passed 00:00:00
dynamic-configuration passed 00:00:00
finalizers passed 00:00:00
init-deploy passed 00:00:00
huge-pages passed 00:00:00
major-upgrade-13-to-14 passed 00:00:00
major-upgrade-14-to-15 passed 00:00:00
major-upgrade-15-to-16 passed 00:00:00
major-upgrade-16-to-17 passed 00:00:00
major-upgrade-17-to-18 passed 00:00:00
ldap passed 00:00:00
ldap-tls passed 00:00:00
monitoring passed 00:00:00
monitoring-pmm3 passed 00:00:00
one-pod passed 00:00:00
operator-self-healing passed 00:00:00
pitr passed 00:00:00
scaling passed 00:00:00
scheduled-backup passed 00:00:00
self-healing passed 00:00:00
sidecars passed 00:00:00
standby-pgbackrest passed 00:00:00
standby-streaming passed 00:00:00
start-from-backup passed 00:00:00
tablespaces passed 00:00:00
telemetry-transfer passed 00:00:00
upgrade-consistency passed 00:00:00
upgrade-minor passed 00:00:00
users passed 00:00:00
Summary Value
Tests Run 37/37
Job Duration 00:46:53
Total Test Time 00:02:20

commit: 29e346e
image: perconalab/percona-postgresql-operator:PR-1578-29e346ee9

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.

5 participants