aws-samples / eks-cluster-upgrade

Automated Amazon EKS cluster upgrade
MIT No Attribution
154 stars 35 forks source link

Bug: Owner ID does not look correct for Windows AMI images #92

Closed dan-hoeger closed 1 year ago

dan-hoeger commented 1 year ago

Expected Behaviour

we are getting a message saying we have custom AMI's when we are using the latest Amazon windows AMI's for the EKS version specified.

our instances are using the following AMI ami-087cc060ba1de1b6d https://us-east-1.console.aws.amazon.com/ec2/home?region=us-east-1#ImageDetails:imageId=ami-087cc060ba1de1b6d Windows_Server-2019-English-Full-EKS_Optimized-1.21-2023.02.14 the owner for this AMI is 957547624766 but in the Preflight code it's looking for an owner of 801119661308

I don't find any EKS_Optimized windows images under that owner.

Current Behaviour

getting the following message in the pre-flight

i-01c9ece320961ce5c cannot be upgraded as it uses a custom AMI! i-06af7621a4c1c99d2 cannot be upgraded as it uses a custom AMI!

Code snippet

try to upgrade a cluster with windows nodes.

Possible Solution

change the owner ID to 957547624766 in iscustomami method for the windows instances.

Steps to Reproduce

try to upgrade a cluster with windows nodes.

Amazon EKS upgrade version

1.22

Python runtime version

3.9

Packaging format used

Git clone

Debugging logs

No response

quixoticmonk commented 1 year ago

Thank you for bringing this up. Taking a look at the current amis for windows show the account id as 957547624766 on us-east-1. @mbeacom Are we changing the underlying method here or do you want me to change the filters in a PR ?

mbeacom commented 1 year ago

@dan-hoeger Thanks for reporting this!

@quixoticmonk We can patch the existing implementation to resolve Dan's issue, but we are replacing this workflow totally in an upcoming release.

mbeacom commented 1 year ago

The fix (#93) for this issue will be released in 0.8.1 thanks to @quixoticmonk.

@dan-hoeger Thank you again for reporting this!

mbeacom commented 1 year ago

@dan-hoeger This bug fix is now released and available in 0.8.1 from PyPi!