Update service checks to ignore server app users #3270
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
I'm not sure why the tests failed. The test that failed is unrelated to my change and when I ran that test locally, it passed. |
|
The CNAME test fails because we removed one of the CNAME records for |
|
|
TorstenDittmann
approved these changes
May 31, 2022
stnguyen90
force-pushed
the
feat-3269-skip-service-check-for-server
branch
from
e0e6c40 to
f645c2c
Compare
rebased! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What does this PR do?
This change updates the service check to ignore (server) app users who authenticate with API key.
Test Plan
Created an E2E test for the change as well as tested manually. The following screenshot shows an API call made with an API key before the change and then after the change:
Related PRs and Issues
Closes #3269
Have you read the Contributing Guidelines on issues?
Yes