-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 39
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
Upgrade k8s depencencies for Openshift 4.16 #615
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Upgrade k8s depencencies for Openshift 4.16 #615
Conversation
main.go
Outdated
HealthProbeBindAddress: probeAddr, | ||
LeaderElection: enableLeaderElection, | ||
LeaderElectionID: "2fc71baf.toolchain.member.operator", | ||
Namespace: namespace, | ||
ClientDisableCacheFor: []client.Object{&kmetrics.NodeMetrics{}}, | ||
Client: client.Options{Cache: &client.CacheOptions{DisableFor: []client.Object{&kmetrics.NodeMetrics{}}}}, |
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.
why do we need to exclude the kmetrics.NodeMetrics
objects?
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.
I went back in the history of commits and found where it was added: 38d239f
Maybe worth adding a comment
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.
added comment in here - bfc55d2
BindAddress: metricsAddr, | ||
}, | ||
Cache: cache.Options{DefaultNamespaces: map[string]cache.Config{namespace: {}}}, | ||
WebhookServer: webhookServer, |
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.
why do we need this webhook server?
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.
Yeah, I have the very same question - we didn't have any webhook configuration before (at least I don't see i there) and we don't use OLM's way of deploying admission webhooks, so do we really need it?
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 had port before which was deprecated and now removed.
from the documentation:
// Port is the port that the webhook server serves at.
// It is used to set webhook.Server.Port if WebhookServer is not set.
//
// Deprecated: Use WebhookServer instead. A WebhookServer can be created via webhook.NewServer.
Port int
for more details I've linked the PR removing deprecated manager options field in the description.
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.
I'm curious if the default value is the same as we set here (port 9443)?
Quality Gate passedIssues Measures |
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## master #615 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 81.59% 81.59%
=======================================
Files 29 29
Lines 3293 3293
=======================================
Hits 2687 2687
Misses 457 457
Partials 149 149 |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: alexeykazakov, ranakan19 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 |
Upgrades:
Changes in code wrt to controller-runtime upgrade (introduced in controller-runtime v0.16.0:
wrt: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SANDBOX-686