Skip to content

CCXDEV-14850: align insights DataGather with config #2248

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged

Conversation

opokornyy
Copy link
Contributor

This PR should align the configuration options in DataGather with the InsightsDataGather

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Mar 26, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

openshift-ci-robot commented Mar 26, 2025

@opokornyy: This pull request references CCXDEV-14850 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.19.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

This PR should align the configuration options in DataGather with the InsightsDataGather

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Mar 26, 2025

Hello @opokornyy! Some important instructions when contributing to openshift/api:
API design plays an important part in the user experience of OpenShift and as such API PRs are subject to a high level of scrutiny to ensure they follow our best practices. If you haven't already done so, please review the OpenShift API Conventions and ensure that your proposed changes are compliant. Following these conventions will help expedite the api review process for your PR.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. label Mar 26, 2025
@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch 2 times, most recently from af4174b to 4bada1b Compare March 27, 2025 08:07
@opokornyy
Copy link
Contributor Author

/cc @ncaak @tremes

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from ncaak and tremes March 27, 2025 10:54
Copy link
Contributor

@everettraven everettraven left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I believe most of this API I've seen before and looks good. I've left comments on stuff that seemed new to me

@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch 2 times, most recently from 4725f08 to 866a461 Compare April 4, 2025 07:33
@everettraven
Copy link
Contributor

Just leaving a general note that some of the changes I've requested are a deviation from the v1alpha1 API that I think would be inherently breaking (i.e removing fields, etc.). I'm still learning what this means for alpha level APIs that are only in TPNU clusters, but I suspect we would likely want to go back and bring the v1alpha1 APIs into alignment (or drop them?).

@JoelSpeed what is the correct approach to follow here?

@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

Since we aren't going to allow clusters to upgrade between v1alpha1 and v1alpha2, we don't need to make changes in the alpha 1 or care about conversion webhooks, so we can make breaking changes here

@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch 3 times, most recently from 811a9a2 to d548836 Compare April 10, 2025 13:19
Copy link
Contributor

@everettraven everettraven left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A couple more comments plus my still outstanding comment on the TotalRisk field.

Other than that, I think this looks good.

@JoelSpeed will need to make a pass on it prior to it being able to merge though

@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch from d548836 to 0fa9cfb Compare April 11, 2025 11:44
Copy link
Contributor

@everettraven everettraven left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A couple more comments. Other than these, I think it looks good.

tagging in @JoelSpeed for a review.

@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch from 0fa9cfb to 882784e Compare April 23, 2025 12:11
@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch 3 times, most recently from bb217af to 522fbdc Compare April 29, 2025 11:18
@opokornyy opokornyy requested a review from JoelSpeed April 30, 2025 11:18
Copy link
Contributor

@everettraven everettraven left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't have any additional comments on this PR. Looks like the only outstanding comment is from @JoelSpeed related to the None gathering mode.

@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch from 522fbdc to c73b718 Compare May 6, 2025 06:54
This commit introduces the v1alpha2 version of the
DataGather CRD for Insights.

Signed-off-by: Ondrej Pokorny <[email protected]>
@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch 2 times, most recently from b32ffb8 to 1806f37 Compare May 6, 2025 08:03
Copy link
Contributor

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Couple of small bits to fix around wording, please add those bits about starting and ending to both the godoc and the CEL error message.

And fix the validation on resource from 1123 to 1035 label as there is a subtle difference

Comment on lines +370 to +375
const (
TotalRiskLow TotalRisk = "Low"
TotalRiskModerate TotalRisk = "Moderate"
TotalRiskImportant TotalRisk = "Important"
TotalRiskCritical TotalRisk = "Critical"
)
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nit: Why Low/Moderate/Important/Critical? I was expecting High to follow Moderate

Copy link
Contributor Author

@opokornyy opokornyy May 9, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't have a strong opinion, but I'll ask @tremes whether this naming was introduced in IO and if it's okay to change it

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This reflects the severity levels defined for the Insights recommendation so it's not easy to change.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ack, that's ok then, just felt like it didn't fit, but if it's already shipped it's already shipped

This commit aligns the configuration options of the
DataGather CRD with those of InsightsDataGather,
making it easier to use both CRDs.

Signed-off-by: Ondrej Pokorny <[email protected]>
@opokornyy opokornyy force-pushed the CCXDEV-15040-insights-v1alpha2 branch from 1806f37 to 7f939ff Compare May 9, 2025 11:54
@opokornyy opokornyy requested a review from JoelSpeed May 13, 2025 06:10
@JoelSpeed
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 13, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented May 13, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: everettraven, JoelSpeed, opokornyy

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label May 13, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented May 13, 2025

@opokornyy: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 9052dea into openshift:master May 13, 2025
12 checks passed
@openshift-bot
Copy link

[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER]

Distgit: ose-cluster-config-api
This PR has been included in build ose-cluster-config-api-container-v4.20.0-202505140744.p0.g9052dea.assembly.stream.el9.
All builds following this will include this PR.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants