Bug 1966416: Do not exceed archive size limit #425
Conversation
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
approved
pkg/gather/gather.go
Outdated
| @@ -44,8 +44,9 @@ type GathererFunctionReport struct { | |||
|
|
|||
| // ArchiveMetadata contains the information about the archive and all its' gatherers | |||
| type ArchiveMetadata struct { | |||
| // info about gathering functions | |||
| StatusReports []GathererFunctionReport `json:"status_reports"` | |||
| // info about gathering functions. We need to use map, because functions will repeat | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We actually don't have to, it could stay an array, but internally we can use a map so that we use only the latest status. Btw, the motivation behind storing all the results was that they can be different(for whatever reason) and we would store all of them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Well I think it's very confusing to store results of failed gatherer which result is not recorded (in the archive), but maybe it's a topic for discussion.
OK for using the map only internally.
|
Looks great, just a few things above |
tremes
force-pushed
the
limit_archive_size
branch
from
a00de3a to
aff5cd4
Compare
tremes
force-pushed
the
limit_archive_size
branch
from
aff5cd4 to
726a5a5
Compare
|
Updated. Please check @Sergey1011010 |
| for _, v := range m { | ||
| a = append(a, v) | ||
| } | ||
| return a |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It would be nice to move this to utils package and reuse...but it causes cyclic dep again AFAIK.
|
@tremes, sorry, didn't notice, looks great, thanks :) |
tremes
changed the title
openshift-ci
bot
removed
the
do-not-merge/work-in-progress
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Sergey1011010, tremes 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 |
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
1 similar comment
|
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
tremes
changed the title
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
bugzilla/severity-medium
|
@tremes: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1966416, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 3 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
bugzilla/valid-bug
|
@tremes: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Bugzilla bug 1966416 has been moved to the MODIFIED state. In response to this:
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/test-infra repository. |
This enforces the data size limit and also fixes a bug with growing metadata file in case of gathering failures.
Categories
Sample archive
TODO we will need to update the metadata json
Documentation
No doc update
Unit Tests
Some tests added in:
pkg/controller/periodic/periodic_test.gopkg/recorder/recorder_test.goPrivacy
Yes. There are no sensitive data in the newly collected information.
Changelog
References
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/???
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=???
https://access.redhat.com/solutions/???