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
Bug 1871676: Monitoring: Change rules list to filter by alert state, not rule state #6460
Bug 1871676: Monitoring: Change rules list to filter by alert state, not rule state #6460
Conversation
Instead of filtering by rule state ("Active" or "Inactive") allow filtering the rules by alert state ("Firing", "Pending", "Silenced" or "Not Firing"). This now mirrors the states shown in the Alert State table column. Having the filter states be different from the states in the column was confusing.
@kyoto: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 1871676, 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
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. |
@@ -428,6 +428,7 @@ export type TableProps = { | |||
loaded?: boolean; | |||
reduxID?: string; | |||
reduxIDs?: string[]; | |||
rowFilters?: any[]; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure why this wasn't here, but Table
does accept the rowFilters
, so I think it should be added.
filterGroupName: 'Rule State', | ||
filter: ruleAlertStateFilter, | ||
filterGroupName: 'Alert State', | ||
isMatch: ruleHasAlertState, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
For this change, we can't use the reducer
because we can't simply reduce each rule to a single value. Instead, we need to iterate through the rule's alerts looking for any one that matches the given alert state.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: kyoto, spadgett 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. |
2 similar comments
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
/retest Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes. |
@kyoto: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged: Bugzilla bug 1871676 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. |
Instead of filtering by rule state ("Active" or "Inactive") allow
filtering the rules by alert state ("Firing", "Pending", "Silenced" or
"Not Firing").
This now mirrors the states shown in the Alert State table column.
Having the filter states be different from the states in the column was
confusing.