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 max tenant config to tenant federation #6493

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

SungJin1212
Copy link
Contributor

This PR adds a flag -tenant-federation.max-tenant to limit the number of tenants to query at once.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #

Checklist

  • Tests updated
  • Documentation added
  • CHANGELOG.md updated - the order of entries should be [CHANGE], [FEATURE], [ENHANCEMENT], [BUGFIX]

@SungJin1212 SungJin1212 force-pushed the Add-max-tenant-config-to-tenant-federation branch from fb55863 to 296381c Compare January 9, 2025 01:07
@dosubot dosubot bot added the lgtm This PR has been approved by a maintainer label Jan 9, 2025
@danielblando
Copy link
Contributor

DId you consider just adding the limit for the frontend code? Somewhere around here

tenantIDs, err := tenant.TenantIDs(r.Context())

Just curious why a new middleware on api. It seems a bit too generic for a limit on query

@SungJin1212
Copy link
Contributor Author

SungJin1212 commented Jan 15, 2025

@danielblando
I didn't consider it at that time, but either way is fine for me.
The reason is it is about tenant validation. Let me change it.

@SungJin1212 SungJin1212 force-pushed the Add-max-tenant-config-to-tenant-federation branch 5 times, most recently from 6e4eaa8 to fa7fd17 Compare January 15, 2025 05:19
@SungJin1212 SungJin1212 force-pushed the Add-max-tenant-config-to-tenant-federation branch from fa7fd17 to beaf3f2 Compare January 15, 2025 05:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
component/querier lgtm This PR has been approved by a maintainer size/L
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants