-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 4.1k
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
feat(rds): Validate log types for clusters #9797
Conversation
Enables exporting database cluster logs to CloudWatch logs. fixes #7810
This builds on #9772 to add validation for the types of logs that are available on each cluster type (by engine). Notes: * Currently a draft: I want feedback on this approach before either adding some constants for ease-of-use and porting a similar approach to instances. * This is built off of #9772, so includes the changes from #9772 while it is pending a push/merge.
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.
Love it! 2 small comments/suggestions.
@@ -61,6 +61,9 @@ export interface IClusterEngine extends IEngine { | |||
/** The application used by this engine to perform rotation for a multi-user scenario. */ | |||
readonly multiUserRotationApplication: secretsmanager.SecretRotationApplication; | |||
|
|||
/** The log types that are available with this engine type */ | |||
readonly logTypes: string[]; |
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.
- Should this be optional? With the understanding that
undefined
means "no validation will happen"? - I feel like this name is a little too terse 🙂.
supportedLogTypes
perhaps?
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.
- Should this be optional?
My take on this is that we know the defined values for the existing clusters, so there's (currently) no reason to make this optional. Would the motivation just be future-proofing?
- I feel like this name is a little too terse 🙂. supportedLogTypes perhaps?
Sure.
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from master and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from master and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
AWS CodeBuild CI Report
Powered by github-codebuild-logs, available on the AWS Serverless Application Repository |
Thank you for contributing! Your pull request will be updated from master and then merged automatically (do not update manually, and be sure to allow changes to be pushed to your fork). |
This builds on aws#9772 to add validation for the types of logs that are available on each cluster type (by engine). Notes: * Currently a draft: I want feedback on this approach before either adding some constants for ease-of-use and porting a similar approach to instances. * This is built off of aws#9772, so includes the changes from aws#9772 while it is pending a push/merge. * Added pr-linter/exempt-readme label (for now) as the current change is validation only. Will add README changes if/when this includes some usable constants. ---- *By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license*
This builds on #9772 to add validation for the types of logs that are available
on each cluster type (by engine).
Notes:
constants for ease-of-use and porting a similar approach to instances.
pending a push/merge.
Will add README changes if/when this includes some usable constants.
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache-2.0 license