Skip to content
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

Add note on jaeger grpc storage compliance #3985

Merged

Conversation

arajkumar
Copy link
Contributor

Which problem is this PR solving?

Short description of the changes

  • Explains how to integrate jaeger storage integration tests
  • Adds info about storage implementations which are complaint to the jaeger storage protocol

arajkumar and others added 2 commits October 19, 2022 11:09
Co-authored-by: Ramon Guiu <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arunprasad Rajkumar <[email protected]>
@arajkumar arajkumar requested a review from a team as a code owner October 19, 2022 09:37
@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Oct 19, 2022

Codecov Report

Base: 97.17% // Head: 97.16% // Decreases project coverage by -0.00% ⚠️

Coverage data is based on head (ed5810f) compared to base (7e673d1).
Patch has no changes to coverable lines.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3985      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   97.17%   97.16%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         295      295              
  Lines       17389    17389              
==========================================
- Hits        16897    16896       -1     
- Misses        396      397       +1     
  Partials       96       96              
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
plugin/storage/integration/integration.go 75.95% <0.00%> (-0.39%) ⬇️

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants