Add readiness health check support in client #1213

Yavor16 · 2024-02-07T06:57:04Z

No description provided.

linux-foundation-easycla · 2024-02-07T06:57:08Z

✅ login: anthonydahanne / name: Anthony Dahanne (b11f5e7, 8587739, 28634e6, b10619f, 0b01437, 43d28c2, a13e9a7, 1c4ad2b, 3aadf50, bb7eb32)
✅ login: radoslav-tomov / name: Radoslav Tomov (591ffd5, d31df18)
✅ login: pacphi / name: Chris Phillipson (23684d9, 243dadd)
✅ login: Yavor16 / name: UzYav (2845c36)
✅ login: pivotal-david-osullivan / name: David O'Sullivan (4cc6371, fa738cc, 66fb3e0, 355658f, 9e1a280)
✅ login: schulzh / name: Hans Schulz (3aee384, 2fafd31)
✅ login: suyash-sap (64e28bb)
❌ The email address for the commit (833a8a1, 97ff664, 7c17c3e) is not linked to the GitHub account, preventing the EasyCLA check. Consult this Help Article and GitHub Help to resolve. (To view the commit's email address, add .patch at the end of this PR page's URL.) For further assistance with EasyCLA, please submit a support request ticket.

Yavor16 · 2024-02-07T11:50:49Z

Hi, @pivotal-david-osullivan, I saw that you have commited a lot of changes recently, so can you take a look at my PR.

pivotal-david-osullivan · 2024-02-15T12:10:09Z

@Yavor16 thank you for the contribution! We are working through PRs at the moment.

Could you please add integration test support to cover the new feature? Liveness health checks can be seen in the integration-test module in places such as here - test setting the type and here - setting the health check in an application push.

Yavor16 · 2024-02-16T13:18:32Z

Hi, @pivotal-david-osullivan,
I can't write integration test and test it because I don't have my own cloudfoundry environment. The one I use for work, I don't have administrator access to it. If you want I can write a test but if you can run it.

Yavor16 · 2024-02-20T09:42:11Z

Hi, @pivotal-david-osullivan,
I wrote an integration test and tested it

anthonydahanne · 2024-02-29T17:00:46Z

hello @Yavor16 , sorry to ask you this late, but could you run mvn spotless:apply and commit / amend ?

It will fix the CI failure on Java 11 that runs the stylecheck

Thank you! worst case, we'll do it ourselves

anthonydahanne · 2024-03-01T14:40:41Z

Hello @Yavor16
Unfortunately, after integration tests run, we had a few errors; such as:

[ERROR] org.cloudfoundry.client.v3.ProcessesTest.updateReadinessHealthCheckType
[ERROR]   Run 1: ProcessesTest.updateReadinessHealthCheckType expectation "expectNext(port)" failed (expected: onNext(port); actual: onError(org.cloudfoundry.reactor.util.JsonParsingException: Cannot construct instance of `org.cloudfoundry.client.v3.applications.GetApplicationProcessResponse`, problem: Cannot build GetApplicationProcessResponse, some of required attributes are not set [readinessHealthCheck]

or

[ERROR] org.cloudfoundry.client.v3.ProcessesTest.update
[ERROR]   Run 1: ProcessesTest.update expectation "expectNext(process)" failed (expected: onNext(process); actual: onError(org.cloudfoundry.reactor.util.JsonParsingException: Cannot construct instance of `org.cloudfoundry.client.v3.applications.GetApplicationProcessResponse`, problem: Cannot build GetApplicationProcessResponse, some of required attributes are not set [readinessHealthCheck]
 at [Source: (byte[])"{"guid":"edeef781-4335-43ac-9343-39f7409759c6","created_at":"2024-03-01T04:57:36Z","updated_at":"2024-03-01T04:57:45Z","type":"web","command":"$HOME/boot.sh","instances":1,"memory_in_mb":64,"disk_in_mb":258,"health_check":{"type":"port","data":{"timeout":null,"invocation_timeout":null}},"relationships":{"app":{"data":{"guid":"edeef781-4335-43ac-9343-39f7409759c6"}},"revision":{"data":{"guid":"a7a89e0e-ac15-43c4-87eb-9e21d3c5a785"}}},"metadata":{"labels":{},"annotations":{}},"links":{"self":{"hre"[truncated 559 bytes]; line: 1, column: 1059]))

or

[ERROR] org.cloudfoundry.operations.ApplicationsTest.pushManifestV3
[ERROR]   Run 1: ApplicationsTest.pushManifestV3 expectation "expectComplete" failed (expected: onComplete(); actual: onError(org.cloudfoundry.reactor.util.JsonParsingException: Cannot construct instance of `org.cloudfoundry.client.v3.processes.ProcessResource`, problem: Cannot build ProcessResource, some of required attributes are not set [readinessHealthCheck]
 at [Source: (byte[])"{"pagination":{"total_results":1,"total_pages":1,"first":{"href":"https://api.sys.polishedpine.cf-app.com/v3/apps/67ee72fe-8b93-40fc-80e4-7ce0f1c08e9b/processes?page=1\u0026per_page=50"},"last":{"href":"https://api.sys.polishedpine.cf-app.com/v3/apps/67ee72fe-8b93-40fc-80e4-7ce0f1c08e9b/processes?page=1\u0026per_page=50"},"next":null,"previous":null},"resources":[{"guid":"67ee72fe-8b93-40fc-80e4-7ce0f1c08e9b","created_at":"2024-03-01T05:20:56Z","updated_at":"2024-03-01T05:21:09Z","type":"web","c"[truncated 944 bytes]; line: 1, column: 1442] (through reference chain: org.cloudfoundry.client.v3.applications.ListApplicationProcessesResponse$Json["resources"]->java.util.ArrayList[0])))

or

[ERROR] org.cloudfoundry.operations.ApplicationsTest.pushManifestV3MultipleApplications
[ERROR]   Run 1: ApplicationsTest.pushManifestV3MultipleApplications expectation "expectComplete" failed (expected: onComplete(); actual: onError(org.cloudfoundry.reactor.util.JsonParsingException: Cannot construct instance of `org.cloudfoundry.client.v3.processes.ProcessResource`, problem: Cannot build ProcessResource, some of required attributes are not set [readinessHealthCheck]
 at [Source: (byte[])"{"pagination":{"total_results":1,"total_pages":1,"first":{"href":"https://api.sys.polishedpine.cf-app.com/v3/apps/2a9c07ee-deb5-464e-a5f6-2875b0b30c45/processes?page=1\u0026per_page=50"},"last":{"href":"https://api.sys.polishedpine.cf-app.com/v3/apps/2a9c07ee-deb5-464e-a5f6-2875b0b30c45/processes?page=1\u0026per_page=50"},"next":null,"previous":null},"resources":[{"guid":"2a9c07ee-deb5-464e-a5f6-2875b0b30c45","created_at":"2024-03-01T05:11:27Z","updated_at":"2024-03-01T05:11:44Z","type":"web","c"[truncated 944 bytes]; line: 1, column: 1442] (through reference chain: org.cloudfoundry.client.v3.applications.ListApplicationProcessesResponse$Json["resources"]->java.util.ArrayList[0])))

Best guess is you missed a required JSON field named readinessHealthCheck

* make sure that we also compile the integration tests during Github CI

* when the extension has a mandatory field to initialize, because ExtendWith only works with default constructor

* add the extension registration declaratively (using an annotation)

adding create security group impl and tests adding get security group api and tests adding get security group impl + test adding list security groups impl + api adding update security group api adding update security group api v3 impl adding security groups delete api v3 impl and tests adding bind running/staging security group v3 api adding bind impl adding unbind security group adding list running/staging api and tests adding create security group test adding integration tests adding integration tests fixing setup/teardown fixing integration tests refactoring integration tests

* tests from radoslav commits

* cause they have interesting things to display

* on top of Hans Schulz "mask off non-permission bits"

porting delete orphaned routes pushing delete route cleaning up leftovers in tests applying default style and fixing missing imports

Yavor16 · 2024-03-06T09:06:36Z

Hello, @anthonydahanne,
I've run the failing tests locally and all of them passed. Also I've run mvn spotless:apply but the file didn't change

Yavor16 · 2024-03-22T09:53:27Z

Here is a gist with the my test results https://gist.github.com/Yavor16/2d6b9c4786242c2bf1eb3ebebe5383da

anthonydahanne · 2024-04-04T02:34:25Z

hello @Yavor16
We got bad news: after rebasing and re testing your PR, we found out that your PR is relying on a recent CAPI version; much more recent than the default we target with current java-cf-client ; which is 2.186.0

We could merge this PR after we require a later version than 2.186.0

Thanks!

Yavor16 · 2024-04-04T07:40:50Z

Hello, @anthonydahanne
So can we add a new feature to the client when the cersion you are using doesn't support it. Also how long do we have to wait for a new CAPI version.

beyhan · 2024-06-06T09:02:31Z

I know about users willing to use the readiness health check blocked by this pr. From the platform side we are also interested to get more feedback for new features. It will be great if the CF Java client could support more recent versions of CAPI which will help also for the adoption of those new features. @pivotal-david-osullivan, @anthonydahanne is there a chance we find a good middle ground here?

anthonydahanne · 2024-06-13T20:45:31Z

@beyhan , yes, we want to unblock this situation.
we'll update you soon

boyan-velinov · 2024-08-01T07:07:19Z

@anthonydahanne Do you have some news on that?
Did you establish a plan how to move the change forward?
Users are eager to use readiness health check feature

boyan-velinov · 2024-11-26T08:26:19Z

Hello @anthonydahanne
I saw some activity around the PR and also a commit related to API v3: 0e3d9ab
Would you mind to share the plans for accepting readiness healthcheck and the overall strategy for integration tests against newer CAPI?

pivotal-david-osullivan · 2024-11-28T10:11:10Z

The commit referenced adds some support for fields in newer CAPI versions. Integration tests are completing successfully for readiness health check on older supported CAPI, we are almost done with tests for the newer version. Once they are passing I plan to add a commit to this PR with some further additions and then we can merge it.

add readiness health check support in client

833a8a1

Yavor16 force-pushed the add-readiness-healthcheck-back-2 branch from ab94811 to 833a8a1 Compare February 7, 2024 07:16

add integration test

97ff664

pacphi and others added 20 commits March 6, 2024 10:12

Upgrade JUnit4 to JUnit5

243dadd

Java 17 and 21 CI is now manually triggered ala workflow_dispatch

23684d9

Revert removal of Test import

28634e6

* make sure that we also compile the integration tests during Github CI

updates Conditonal CloudFoundry version based test to JUnit 5

4cc6371

Do not use ExtendWith

43d28c2

* when the extension has a mandatory field to initialize, because ExtendWith only works with default constructor

Junit4 to Junit4 Integration Tests migration

8587739

* add the extension registration declaratively (using an annotation)

Modified getOrganizationId() & getSpaceId() as per V3

64e28bb

Ignore .idea/ for real now

a13e9a7

Migration to Junit5

3aadf50

* tests from radoslav commits

Make integration tests chatty

b10619f

* cause they have interesting things to display

Add globally enabled

0b01437

Spotless apply; include integration-test

b11f5e7

mask off non-permission bits

3aee384

apply spotless formatting

bb7eb32

* on top of Hans Schulz "mask off non-permission bits"

porting check route to v3 api

d31df18

porting delete orphaned routes pushing delete route cleaning up leftovers in tests applying default style and fixing missing imports

PR cloudfoundry#1194: rebase and format with spotless

1c4ad2b

defaultApplication-api

0f06eee

minor changes

b8ffe42

Modified Junit tests to adopt V3 changes.

931fdaf

pivotal-david-osullivan and others added 6 commits March 6, 2024 10:16

rebasing 1173

355658f

fix health check type serialization

2fafd31

Update tcp-routes.yml

9e1a280

Update tcp-routes.yml

66fb3e0

Update IntegrationTestConfiguration.java

fa738cc

fix formatting

7c17c3e

pivotal-david-osullivan force-pushed the add-readiness-healthcheck-back-2 branch 2 times, most recently from a07bdfd to c748a4d Compare April 2, 2024 14:59

anthonydahanne mentioned this pull request Jun 16, 2024

Move Anthony Dahanne to Buildpacks and Java tools approver cloudfoundry/community#899

Merged

anthonydahanne force-pushed the add-readiness-healthcheck-back-2 branch from d8ab20c to 60e1dc1 Compare November 1, 2024 16:09

This was referenced Dec 3, 2024

Readiness Healthcheck support #1253

Closed

Healthcheck support #1254

Open

boyan-velinov mentioned this pull request Dec 4, 2024

support for readiness-health-check-* SAP/cloud-mta-build-tool#1147

Open

test

2845c36

Yavor16 force-pushed the add-readiness-healthcheck-back-2 branch from 60e1dc1 to 2845c36 Compare December 5, 2024 09:35

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Add readiness health check support in client #1213

Add readiness health check support in client #1213

Yavor16 commented Feb 7, 2024

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Feb 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

Yavor16 commented Feb 7, 2024

pivotal-david-osullivan commented Feb 15, 2024

Yavor16 commented Feb 16, 2024

Yavor16 commented Feb 20, 2024

anthonydahanne commented Feb 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading

anthonydahanne commented Mar 1, 2024

Yavor16 commented Mar 6, 2024

Yavor16 commented Mar 22, 2024

anthonydahanne commented Apr 4, 2024

Yavor16 commented Apr 4, 2024

beyhan commented Jun 6, 2024

anthonydahanne commented Jun 13, 2024

boyan-velinov commented Aug 1, 2024

boyan-velinov commented Nov 26, 2024

pivotal-david-osullivan commented Nov 28, 2024

Add readiness health check support in client #1213

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Add readiness health check support in client #1213

Conversation

Yavor16 commented Feb 7, 2024

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Feb 7, 2024 • edited Loading

Yavor16 commented Feb 7, 2024

pivotal-david-osullivan commented Feb 15, 2024

Yavor16 commented Feb 16, 2024

Yavor16 commented Feb 20, 2024

anthonydahanne commented Feb 29, 2024 • edited Loading

anthonydahanne commented Mar 1, 2024

Yavor16 commented Mar 6, 2024

Yavor16 commented Mar 22, 2024

anthonydahanne commented Apr 4, 2024

Yavor16 commented Apr 4, 2024

beyhan commented Jun 6, 2024

anthonydahanne commented Jun 13, 2024

boyan-velinov commented Aug 1, 2024

boyan-velinov commented Nov 26, 2024

pivotal-david-osullivan commented Nov 28, 2024

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Feb 7, 2024 •

edited

Loading

anthonydahanne commented Feb 29, 2024 •

edited

Loading