-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 14
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
Resource names alignment #108
Conversation
Codecov Report
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #108 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 69.56% 70.14% +0.58%
==========================================
Files 14 15 +1
Lines 1025 1055 +30
==========================================
+ Hits 713 740 +27
- Misses 270 271 +1
- Partials 42 44 +2
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
|
8069507
to
a50ee17
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.
Every thing is working as I expected.
The only changes I am asking for is to help our future self remove the required upgrade logic.
a50ee17
to
5a132ba
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.
Changes looks good to me
changes LGTM, just dropped some enhancements that could be IMO interesing. Feel free to skip those. |
70c1b13
to
3b0ea2a
Compare
It'd be great to have this in the upcoming release |
it should be rebased on top of current |
e90417d
to
31f08fb
Compare
31f08fb
to
5a9d701
Compare
5a9d701
to
d22d51f
Compare
This fixes the inconsistency in the naming of resources created by the operator, specifically the deployment and limits config map. Simply by adding the "limitador-" prefix to both of them.
As in the scenario described in the issue, the deployment becomes named
limitador-cluster
and the configmapimitador-limits-config-cluster
.Additionally there is an upgrade path provided for the deployment and configmap.
I was not sure if it's ok to simply delete and create a new configmap with the
limitador-
prefixed new name or should the contents be migrated from the old configmap to the new one.That said, if we decide the upgrade path brings little value at this stage - I'm happy to drop it completely.
Fixes #105
Verification
Using the sample given in the issue - with redis.
Create redis deployment, service and secret:
Make sure you are on the older version of the limitador-operator on the main branch:
Deploy Limitador CR:
Switch to the feature branch with the updated Deployment and Limits ConfigMap names:
Check the Limits config map and Limitador deployment names:
Deploy the new version of the operator:
New Limits config map with the name of
limitador-limits-config-cluster
should get created and the new deployment with the namelimitador-cluster
. Old resources get deleted.Clean up: