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.

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

NETOBSERV-59 Add tcp flow stream exporter #224

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

jpinsonneau
Copy link
Contributor

Description

This PR add TCP flow stream exporter for cli.

Dependencies

netobserv/network-observability-cli#1

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

  • Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
  • Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
  • Does this PR require product documentation?
    • If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
  • Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
    • If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
  • Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
    • If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
  • QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
    • Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
    • Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
    • No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 17, 2023

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from jpinsonneau. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

Copy link

codecov bot commented Nov 17, 2023

Codecov Report

Attention: 48 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (0c43b4a) 33.62% compared to head (ce87754) 33.17%.

Files Patch % Lines
pkg/exporter/flows.go 0.00% 37 Missing ⚠️
pkg/agent/agent.go 0.00% 11 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #224      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   33.62%   33.17%   -0.46%     
==========================================
  Files          39       40       +1     
  Lines        3494     3542      +48     
==========================================
  Hits         1175     1175              
- Misses       2251     2299      +48     
  Partials       68       68              
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 33.17% <0.00%> (-0.46%) ⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@jotak
Copy link
Member

jotak commented Nov 17, 2023

Why not using the existing grpc exporter with the CLI ? Does it come with additional challenges?

@msherif1234
Copy link
Contributor

Why not using the existing grpc exporter with the CLI ? Does it come with additional challenges?

I asked the exact same question netobserv/network-observability-cli#1 (comment)

thinking more about this it might even be better to run in the same process of ebpf agent and consume directly ebpf records like what the direct flp did ? WDYT ?

@jpinsonneau
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this in favor of #291

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants