Skip to content

🤖 docs: update the Terminating namespace step after the #209 fix - #219

Merged
ThomasK33 merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
docs/troubleshooting-209-fixed
Oct 3, 2026
Merged

ThomasK33 merged 3 commits into
mainfrom
docs/troubleshooting-209-fixed

Conversation

@ThomasK33

@ThomasK33 ThomasK33 commented Oct 3, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Summary

The troubleshooting step "A namespace stays Terminating" still said that #209 makes a namespace without an eligible control plane hang forever. #214 fixed that for a namespace that has no CoderControlPlane at all: the aggregated API now answers its list with an empty list.

What

Step 2 of the section is now three short sentences and two commands, with no list of cases:

  1. If NamespaceDeletionContentFailure is True, read its message. It contains the error that the aggregated API returned for the namespace controller's list, for example a 503 or a 400.
  2. For what each error means, it links Namespaces without a Coder backend and the existing "Aggregated reads return ServiceUnavailable" entry.
  3. If a CoderControlPlane is still in the namespace, check its finalizers (for example coder.com/workspace-rbac-cleanup) and the controller logs.

The note that #214 added under "Aggregated reads return ServiceUnavailable" stays as it is. This change does not repeat it.

Review rounds

  1. Round 1 found four gaps in a list of cases. The second commit fixed them.
  2. Round 2 found three more gaps in that list. Instead of a longer list, cfc8e16 simplifies the step so that it no longer lists cases.

Validation

On the pushed tree: make docs-check (strict build), markdownlint-cli2 0.18.1, and cspell 8.19.4, each with exit 0. The built page contains both new links.

Refs #209
Refs #215


Generated with xum • Model: anthropic:claude-opus-5-5 • Thinking: high

The troubleshooting step still said that a namespace without an eligible control plane never finishes deleting. #214 fixed that for a namespace without any control plane. The step now links the reference section and names the two cases that still answer the list with 503: a control plane that is not eligible, until the namespace controller deletes it, and a standalone server without Coder credentials (#215).

Refs #209
Refs #215

Signed-off-by: Thomas Kosiewski <tk@coder.com>

---
_Generated with [`xum`](https://github.com/coder/xum) • Model: `anthropic:claude-opus-5-5` • Thinking: `high`_

Change-Id: I6392df4a7a310671ef5b0bb06970e09ba16de436
@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex security review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Oct 3, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
📝 Code Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-03T18:03:09.941603Z cfc8e16 Manual request
🔒 Security Review ✅ Completed 2026-10-03T18:00:56.998972Z cfc8e16 Manual request
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b015cf27b6

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: b015cf27b6

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md Outdated
Review found four gaps in the rewritten step. The namespace controller lists only coderworkspaces and codertemplates, because codertemplateversions has no delete verb. The empty list applies to namespaces without a Coder backend in each app mode, as the reference defines them, and the pinned standalone namespace returns what Coder holds. A control plane whose operator token Secret lacks the key or holds an empty value also returns 503. A standalone server answers 503 only without both its URL and token, and does not start when only one is missing.

Refs #209
Refs #215

Signed-off-by: Thomas Kosiewski <tk@coder.com>

---
_Generated with [`xum`](https://github.com/coder/xum) • Model: `anthropic:claude-opus-5-5` • Thinking: `high`_

Change-Id: Iedda13df230ae69d834f9db07216015f9fb37b26
@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex security review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 9adbb8ac9e

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 9adbb8ac9e

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md Outdated
Each review round added cases to step 2, and each case drew new findings. The step now tells the reader to read the NamespaceDeletionContentFailure message, links the reference and the ServiceUnavailable entry for what each error means, and points to the control plane's finalizers and the controller logs. It no longer lists cases, and it drops the standalone --coder-namespace note.

Refs #209
Refs #215

Signed-off-by: Thomas Kosiewski <tk@coder.com>

---
_Generated with [`xum`](https://github.com/coder/xum) • Model: `anthropic:claude-opus-5-5` • Thinking: `high`_

Change-Id: I6ec365ecd630d27daa03923e36f5963ab739da6f
@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex review

@ThomasK33

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@codex security review

@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🛡️ Codex Security Review

Security review completed. No security issues were found in this pull request.

Reviewed commit: cfc8e162ac

View security finding report

Only the user who started this review can view the report in Codex.

ℹ️ About Codex security reviews in GitHub

This is an experimental Codex feature. Security reviews are triggered when:

  • You comment "@codex security review"
  • A regular code review gets triggered (for example, "@codex review" or when a PR is opened), and you’re opted in so security review runs alongside code review

Once complete, Codex will leave suggestions, or a comment if no findings are found.

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: cfc8e162ac

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md
Comment thread docs/how-to/troubleshooting.md
@ThomasK33
ThomasK33 added this pull request to the merge queue Oct 3, 2026
Merged via the queue into main with commit 55e7f34 Oct 3, 2026
13 checks passed
@ThomasK33
ThomasK33 deleted the docs/troubleshooting-209-fixed branch October 3, 2026 18:22
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.

1 participant