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

fix(wasm): validate filters in all persistence modes #11288

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 28, 2023

Conversation

flrgh
Copy link
Contributor

@flrgh flrgh commented Jul 25, 2023

Summary

The primary purpose of this change is to ensure that each .filters[].name is validated against available/installed filters in dbless mode (this was only working in db mode prior).

I also added an additional entity check which will return a more descriptive error when wasm is disabled or no filters are present (this is more useful for dbless mode than anything).

Checklist

  • The Pull Request has tests
  • [ ] There's an entry in the CHANGELOG
  • [ ] There is a user-facing docs PR

Issue reference

KAG-2059

@flrgh flrgh force-pushed the fix/wasm-dbless-validation branch 4 times, most recently from b2fb848 to 2dde6a1 Compare July 26, 2023 21:50
@flrgh flrgh marked this pull request as ready for review July 26, 2023 21:50
@flrgh flrgh requested review from hishamhm and gszr July 26, 2023 21:50
@flrgh flrgh added this to the 3.4.0 milestone Jul 26, 2023
@flrgh flrgh force-pushed the fix/wasm-dbless-validation branch from 2dde6a1 to 7ba92da Compare July 26, 2023 22:14
Copy link
Contributor

@hishamhm hishamhm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Looks like a more consistent approach overall!

kong-3.4.0-0.rockspec Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
kong/runloop/wasm.lua Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
kong/db/schema/entities/filter_chains.lua Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
spec/02-integration/20-wasm/02-db_spec.lua Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@flrgh flrgh force-pushed the fix/wasm-dbless-validation branch from 7ba92da to 0789fcb Compare July 27, 2023 23:23
@flrgh flrgh force-pushed the fix/wasm-dbless-validation branch 2 times, most recently from 953e7b7 to 9a6b04f Compare July 27, 2023 23:29
@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Jul 28, 2023

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@flrgh flrgh force-pushed the fix/wasm-dbless-validation branch from 4aa1ebb to 807d91f Compare July 28, 2023 17:09
@flrgh flrgh force-pushed the fix/wasm-dbless-validation branch from 807d91f to eb0aff4 Compare July 28, 2023 17:28
@zhongweiy zhongweiy self-requested a review July 28, 2023 17:43
@flrgh flrgh merged commit 33dbd4f into master Jul 28, 2023
@flrgh flrgh deleted the fix/wasm-dbless-validation branch July 28, 2023 18:58
team-gateway-bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2023
The primary purpose of this change is to ensure that each .filters[].name
is validated against available/installed filters in dbless mode (this was
only working in db mode prior).

I also added an additional entity check which will return a more descriptive
error when wasm is disabled or no filters are present (this is more useful
for dbless mode than anything).

(cherry picked from commit 33dbd4f)
flrgh added a commit that referenced this pull request Jul 28, 2023
The primary purpose of this change is to ensure that each .filters[].name
is validated against available/installed filters in dbless mode (this was
only working in db mode prior).

I also added an additional entity check which will return a more descriptive
error when wasm is disabled or no filters are present (this is more useful
for dbless mode than anything).

(cherry picked from commit 33dbd4f)

Co-authored-by: Michael Martin <flrgh@protonmail.com>
@kikito kikito mentioned this pull request Aug 9, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants