Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[Kubenretes Integration] Adding deployment condition status in kube state deployment dataset #6821

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Sep 5, 2023
Merged

[Kubenretes Integration] Adding deployment condition status in kube state deployment dataset #6821

merged 5 commits into from
Sep 5, 2023

Conversation

gizas
Copy link
Contributor

@gizas gizas commented Jul 5, 2023 •
edited
Loading

**** DONT MERGE UNTIL 8.10 is released****

  • Enhancement

What does this PR do?

Introduces in Kubernetes Integration the new deployment condition status field

Checklist

  • I have reviewed tips for building integrations and this pull request is aligned with them.
  • I have verified that all data streams collect metrics or logs.
  • I have added an entry to my package's changelog.yml file.
  • I have verified that Kibana version constraints are current according to guidelines.

How to test this PR locally

See inforamtion here: elastic/elastic-agent#2995

Related issues

@gizas gizas requested a review from a team as a code owner July 5, 2023 10:13
@gizas gizas self-assigned this Jul 5, 2023
@gizas gizas added the Team:Cloudnative-Monitoring Label for the Cloud Native Monitoring team label Jul 5, 2023
@gizas gizas changed the title adding deployment condition status [Kubenretes Integration] Adding deployment condition status in kube state deployment dataset Jul 5, 2023
This was referenced Jul 5, 2023
Merged
Closed
@elasticmachine
Copy link

elasticmachine commented Jul 5, 2023 •
edited
Loading

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS
Pipeline View Test View Changes Artifacts preview preview

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

  • Start Time: 2023-09-05T10:25:02.189+0000

  • Duration: 53 min 5 sec

Test stats 🧪

Test Results
Failed 0
Passed 92
Skipped 0
Total 92

🤖 GitHub comments

Expand to view the GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

  • /test : Re-trigger the build.

tetianakravchenko
tetianakravchenko reviewed Jul 5, 2023
View reviewed changes
packages/kubernetes/manifest.yml Outdated
@@ -11,7 +11,7 @@ categories:
- kubernetes
release: ga
conditions:
kibana.version: "^8.8.0"
kibana.version: "^8.8.2"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

are you planning to backport elastic/beats#35999 to this version? I believe 8.8.2 was already released, so it will not land in 8.8.2, isn't it?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Deliberately made because this field will be present only when elastic/beats#35999 is merged.
And yes we will need a version later than 8.8.2. Is not that correct?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't need to update the kibana version as we are not using any new kibana feature for this. The new fields will start get populated in version beats 8.10. But that doesn't mean we need to set it to 8.10 in the kibana version constraints. Until the agent 8.10 is released the added fields will not be populated. If we set the version to 8.10 here, then we won't be able to introduce new immediate changes to the integration.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Makes sense! Thanks for clarifications @MichaelKatsoulis .

Reverted change for kibana. Thank you both

Copy link
Member

@ChrsMark ChrsMark Jul 5, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's more correct if we set this to 8.10. Otherwise the new package's version will mention in the docs the new field but this will not be populated right? I believe fields' docs should be aligned with the features.

Not having the option to do changes for previous versions is a known issue but we should not deliver inaccurate packages just to by pass this.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So you are suggesting to freeze this PR until 8.10 gets released or until we need to update the kibana constraint for a different PR ? Because just putting 8.10 now prevents us from any other update targeting to 8.9 or 8.8

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Freezing it won't be a real problem as long as the feature is not yet released, right?

So I'm suggesting to either freeze it or/and raise this conversation to a wider audience to make sure that we have a solid process to handle cases like these in the future.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes let's freeze this until it makes sense.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

So by reading the above discussion:

  • We will keep the kibana constrain to "^8.8.0"
  • Wait until 8.10 is released and then merge this integration

Raise a question in today's meeting call: "how we handle integrations upgrades that need to match specific beats version?"

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You will also need to update the constrain.

So it's: Wait until 8.10 is released and then merge this integration with 8.10.0 constrain.

@elasticmachine
Copy link

elasticmachine commented Jul 5, 2023 •
edited
Loading

🌐 Coverage report

Name Metrics % (covered/total) Diff
Packages 100.0% (0/0) 💚
Files 100.0% (0/0) 💚 3.358
Classes 100.0% (0/0) 💚 3.358
Methods 96.154% (75/78) 👍 3.83
Lines 100.0% (0/0) 💚 11.73
Conditionals 100.0% (0/0) 💚

@ChrsMark ChrsMark mentioned this pull request Jul 6, 2023
Open
ChrsMark
ChrsMark requested changes Jul 6, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ChrsMark ChrsMark left a comment •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Since we agree on this let's stall the PR for now.

kibana.version should be ^8.10.0 for this be merged.

@botelastic
Copy link

botelastic bot commented Aug 5, 2023

Hi! We just realized that we haven't looked into this PR in a while. We're sorry! We're labeling this issue as Stale to make it hit our filters and make sure we get back to it as soon as possible. In the meantime, it'd be extremely helpful if you could take a look at it as well and confirm its relevance. A simple comment with a nice emoji will be enough :+1. Thank you for your contribution!

@botelastic botelastic bot added the Stalled label Aug 5, 2023
@botelastic
Copy link

botelastic bot commented Sep 4, 2023

Hi! This PR has been stale for a while and we're going to close it as part of our cleanup procedure. We appreciate your contribution and would like to apologize if we have not been able to review it, due to the current heavy load of the team. Feel free to re-open this PR if you think it should stay open and is worth rebasing. Thank you for your contribution!

@botelastic botelastic bot closed this Sep 4, 2023
@gizas gizas reopened this Sep 5, 2023
@botelastic botelastic bot removed the Stalled label Sep 5, 2023
@gizas
Copy link
Contributor Author

gizas commented Sep 5, 2023

Reopening and updated constrain to ^8.10.0 as per discusion above.
See 362cc4a

@gizas gizas requested review from a team as code owners September 5, 2023 09:38
@gizas gizas requested review from a team as code owners September 5, 2023 09:38
ChrsMark
ChrsMark approved these changes Sep 5, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@ChrsMark ChrsMark left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@gizas gizas removed request for a team September 5, 2023 10:21
@gizas gizas merged commit 2b9a50f into main Sep 5, 2023
4 checks passed
@gizas gizas deleted the deployment_condition branch September 5, 2023 11:35
@elasticmachine
Copy link

Package kubernetes - 1.44.0 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=kubernetes

@tetianakravchenko tetianakravchenko mentioned this pull request Sep 27, 2023
Merged
4 tasks
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jsoriano jsoriano jsoriano left review comments

@MichaelKatsoulis MichaelKatsoulis MichaelKatsoulis approved these changes

@tetianakravchenko tetianakravchenko tetianakravchenko left review comments

@ChrsMark ChrsMark ChrsMark approved these changes

@devamanv devamanv Awaiting requested review from devamanv devamanv is a code owner automatically assigned from elastic/obs-cloudnative-monitoring

@constanca-m constanca-m Awaiting requested review from constanca-m constanca-m is a code owner automatically assigned from elastic/obs-cloudnative-monitoring

Assignees

@gizas gizas

Labels
Integration:kubernetes Kubernetes Team:Cloudnative-Monitoring Label for the Cloud Native Monitoring team
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
7 participants
@gizas @elasticmachine @jsoriano @ChrsMark @MichaelKatsoulis @tetianakravchenko @andrewkroh