Fix order of processing of some xx-add/xx-rm service update flags #2668
Fix order of processing of some xx-add/xx-rm service update flags
Combining `-add` and `-rm` flags on `docker service update` should
be usable to explicitly replace existing options. The current order
of processing did not allow this, causing the `-rm` flag to remove
properties that were specified in `-add`. This behavior was inconsistent
with (for example) `--host-add` and `--host-rm`.
This patch updates the behavior to first remove properties, then
add new properties.
Note that there's still some improvements to make, to make the removal
more granulas (e.g. to make `--label-rm label=some-value` only remove
the label if value matches `some-value`); these changes are left for
a follow-up.
Before this change:
-----------------------------
Create a service with two env-vars
```bash
docker service create --env FOO=bar --env BAR=baz --name=test nginx:alpine
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.TaskTemplate.ContainerSpec.Env }}' test | jq .
[
"FOO=bar",
"BAR=baz"
]
```
Update the service, with the intent to replace the value of `FOO` for a new value
```bash
docker service update --env-rm FOO --env-add FOO=updated-foo test
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.TaskTemplate.ContainerSpec.Env }}' test | jq .
[
"BAR=baz"
]
```
Create a service with two labels
```bash
docker service create --label FOO=bar --label BAR=baz --name=test nginx:alpine
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.Labels }}' test | jq .
{
"BAR": "baz",
"FOO": "bar"
}
```
Update the service, with the intent to replace the value of `FOO` for a new value
```bash
docker service update --label-rm FOO --label-add FOO=updated-foo test
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.Labels }}' test | jq .
{
"BAR": "baz"
}
```
Create a service with two container labels
```bash
docker service create --container-label FOO=bar --container-label BAR=baz --name=test nginx:alpine
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.TaskTemplate.ContainerSpec.Labels }}' test | jq .
{
"BAR": "baz",
"FOO": "bar"
}
```
Update the service, with the intent to replace the value of `FOO` for a new value
```bash
docker service update --container-label-rm FOO --container-label-add FOO=updated-foo test
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.TaskTemplate.ContainerSpec.Labels }}' test | jq .
{
"BAR": "baz",
}
```
With this patch applied:
--------------------------------
Create a service with two env-vars
```bash
docker service create --env FOO=bar --env BAR=baz --name=test nginx:alpine
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.TaskTemplate.ContainerSpec.Env }}' test | jq .
[
"FOO=bar",
"BAR=baz"
]
```
Update the service, and replace the value of `FOO` for a new value
```bash
docker service update --env-rm FOO --env-add FOO=updated-foo test
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.TaskTemplate.ContainerSpec.Env }}' test | jq .
[
"BAR=baz",
"FOO=updated-foo"
]
```
Create a service with two labels
```bash
docker service create --label FOO=bar --label BAR=baz --name=test nginx:alpine
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.Labels }}' test | jq .
{
"BAR": "baz",
"FOO": "bar"
}
```
Update the service, and replace the value of `FOO` for a new value
```bash
docker service update --label-rm FOO --label-add FOO=updated-foo test
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.Labels }}' test | jq .
{
"BAR": "baz",
"FOO": "updated-foo"
}
```
Create a service with two container labels
```bash
docker service create --container-label FOO=bar --container-label BAR=baz --name=test nginx:alpine
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.TaskTemplate.ContainerSpec.Labels }}' test | jq .
{
"BAR": "baz",
"FOO": "bar"
}
```
Update the service, and replace the value of `FOO` for a new value
```bash
docker service update --container-label-rm FOO --container-label-add FOO=updated-foo test
docker service inspect --format '{{json .Spec.TaskTemplate.ContainerSpec.Labels }}' test | jq .
{
"BAR": "baz",
"FOO": "updated-foo"
}
```
Signed-off-by: Sebastiaan van Stijn <[email protected]>- Loading branch information
commit 2fc608cea6b5a68b60eaaf1f334168dfdded938b
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
question: should we test field to?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Good one, I easily get confused by these 🤔
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah pointer on pointer is mind blowing 😁
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'll look for the extra check in a follow-up