-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 117
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
Trigger Reconciler for ConsumerGroup scaling #1569
Trigger Reconciler for ConsumerGroup scaling #1569
Conversation
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1569 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 74.87% 73.13% -1.74%
Complexity 595 595
============================================
Files 116 118 +2
Lines 4211 4348 +137
Branches 171 171
============================================
+ Hits 3153 3180 +27
- Misses 802 909 +107
- Partials 256 259 +3
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
8c90821
to
69481b8
Compare
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.
We should create a new Trigger reconciler rather than changing the existing one since the logic is completely different between the 2.
19e6eb3
to
c4122fa
Compare
afd1b3f
to
3f3fd62
Compare
3f3fd62
to
07af0c9
Compare
d9301fe
to
5cf4f38
Compare
5cf4f38
to
c03a124
Compare
c03a124
to
160ab6c
Compare
Spec: internalscg.ConsumerGroupSpec{ | ||
Template: internalscg.ConsumerTemplateSpec{ | ||
Spec: internalscg.ConsumerSpec{ | ||
Topics: []string{}, //todo from contract resource |
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.
Ideally, we should get topics from the broker status.
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.
Sure - will add in my next iteration along with unit test
Template: internalscg.ConsumerTemplateSpec{ | ||
Spec: internalscg.ConsumerSpec{ | ||
Topics: []string{}, //todo from contract resource | ||
Configs: internalscg.ConsumerConfigs{Configs: map[string]string{"group.id": string(trigger.UID)}}, |
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.
We should also set bootstrap.servers
that we, ideally, get from the broker status.
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.
Same as above
/lgtm
We can merge this once the test is fixed. |
Signed-off-by: aavarghese <avarghese@us.ibm.com>
Signed-off-by: aavarghese <avarghese@us.ibm.com>
10c35f6
to
0fb095b
Compare
Signed-off-by: aavarghese <avarghese@us.ibm.com>
0fb095b
to
97af4f1
Compare
This should be the fix:
|
Signed-off-by: aavarghese <avarghese@us.ibm.com>
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
@aavarghese: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
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
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: aavarghese, pierDipi 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 |
Part of #1537 (
triggerv2_test.go
coming soon)Proposed Changes
Release Note
Docs