[v11.0.x] Alerting: Fix simplified routes '...' groupBy creating invalid routes #86376
Conversation
This file contains 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
![grafana-delivery-bot[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/329617?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
…#86006) * Alerting: Fix simplified routes '...' groupBy creating invalid routes There were a few ways to go about this fix: 1. Modifying our copy of upstream validation to allow this 2. Modify our notification settings validation to prevent this 3. Normalize group by on save 4. Normalized group by on generate Option 4. was chosen as the others have a mix of the following cons: - Generated routes risk being incompatible with upstream/remote AM - Awkward FE UX when using '...' - Rule definition changing after save and potential pitfalls with TF With option 4. generated routes stay compatible with external/remote AMs, FE doesn't need to change as we allow mixed '...' and custom label groupBys, and settings we save to db are the same ones requested. In addition, it has the slight benefit of allowing us to hide the internal implementation details of `alertname, grafana_folder` from the user in the future, since we don't need to send them with every FE or TF request. * Safer use of DefaultNotificationSettingsGroupBy * Fix missed API tests (cherry picked from commit 533bed6)
grafana-delivery-bot
bot
requested review from
a team,
rwwiv,
JacobsonMT,
yuri-tceretian and
grobinson-grafana
and removed request for
a team
grafana-delivery-bot
bot
added
add to changelog
area/alerting
JacobsonMT
approved these changes
Apr 16, 2024
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Backport 533bed6 from #86006
What is this feature?
This bugfix has the following effects to simplified routing
GroupBy:..., then the generated route will contain only the special label....grafana_folderandalertnamelabels. IfGroupByis overridden, any missing required labels will be added during route generation.GroupBywill have the labels sorted consistently: first the required labels followed by any custom labels in sorted order.Why do we need this feature?
This fixes a bug where selecting
...as a label for simplified routing group by would generate an invalid route according to upstream standards thus preventing any further AM config saves until the simplified routeGroupBy...label was removed.There were a few ways to go about this fix:
GroupBywith mixed...and other labels.GroupBywith mixed...and other labels.GroupByby on save.GroupByby on route generation.Option 4. was chosen as the others have the following cons:
With option 4. generated routes stay compatible with external/remote AMs, FE doesn't need to change as we allow mixed '...' with custom labels, and settings we save to db are the same as the ones requested.
In addition, it has the slight benefit of allowing us to hide the internal implementation details of
alertname, grafana_folderfrom the user in the future, since we don't need to send them with every FE or TF request.Who is this feature for?
Users of simplified routing.
Which issue(s) does this PR fix?:
Fixes #86005, #84073
Peek.2024-04-11.19-27.webm