feat(fluentbit): add support for multiline_buffer_limit configuration…#1877
Merged
joshuabaird merged 1 commit intofluent:masterfrom Feb 25, 2026
Merged
Conversation
… to FluentBitConfig and ClusterFluentBitConfig Signed-off-by: Dylan Jenik <dylanjenikcodes@gmail.com>
eatmyrust
changed the title
joshuabaird
approved these changes
Feb 25, 2026
Collaborator
|
Thanks for your contribution, @eatmyrust! |
joshuabaird
pushed a commit
to joshuabaird/fluent-operator
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 27, 2026
… to FluentBitConfig and ClusterFluentBitConfig (fluent#1877) Signed-off-by: Dylan Jenik <dylanjenikcodes@gmail.com>
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
… to FluentBitConfig and ClusterFluentBitConfig
What this PR does / why we need it:
Adds support for the multiline_buffer_limit configuration field.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #1876
Does this PR introduced a user-facing change?
Additional documentation, usage docs, etc.: