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

[Kubernetes][Dashboards] Fix missing sort field on proxy and scheduler dashboards #6221

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
May 17, 2023

Conversation

constanca-m
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Fixes an incorrect visualization:
image

That is present in both scheduler and proxy dashboards.

It should work as expected now:
image

Checklist

  • I have reviewed tips for building integrations and this pull request is aligned with them.
  • I have verified that all data streams collect metrics or logs.
  • I have added an entry to my package's changelog.yml file.
  • I have verified that Kibana version constraints are current according to guidelines.

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
@constanca-m constanca-m self-assigned this May 16, 2023
@constanca-m constanca-m requested review from a team as code owners May 16, 2023 09:58
@constanca-m constanca-m requested a review from gsantoro May 16, 2023 09:58
Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
@@ -9,6 +9,11 @@
- description: Remove container.name as a dimension.
type: enhancement
link: https://github.com/elastic/integrations/pull/6209
- version: "1.38.2"
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should use 1.39.1, I believe 1.39.0 will not be rebuild after merging this PR, and 1.39.0 will not include those changes

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Interesting, I did not know that. I will update to 1.39.1 then

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jsoriano could you please double-check this? is my assumption correct regarding the package version rebuilds?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Any new version would be published on merge, so if none of them are published, then both would work in that regard.
Said that, I would go with the proposal of using 1.39.1, so you can still reserve 1.38.X for backports to this minor if needed at some point.

If you need this fix in 1.38 for some reason, I would suggest to merge it first as 1.39.1, and after that follow this procedure to release a 1.38.2 version: https://github.com/elastic/integrations/blob/ce78cfe4a13c14528bb88b809d7ed2789dd1b2ab/docs/developer_workflow_bug_fix_older_package_version.md

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@jsoriano there were no kibana restrictions introduces, so it should be fine to go with 1.39.1
the issue here is: the latest version is version: "1.40.0-beta", is it possible to rebuild 1.40.0-beta after publishing 1.39.1 with this changes? or there should be created 1.40.1-beta (with those changes) first and backported to the 1.39.1?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Oh ok, I was overlooking these changes for 1.40. If you merge this change as is now, it will publish a 1.39.1 version that will include #6159. You probably don't want that.

So I think you need to:

  • On this PR, start a new version in the changelog, for example 1.40.0-beta.1. And move the new changelog entry there.
  • Once merged, it will release 1.40.0-beta.1 with this fix.
  • Then follow this procedure to backport the fix to 1.39.

You can introduce further changes on the prerelease numbering the qualifiers, with beta.1, beta.2 and so on.

If you want to introduce multiple changes in 1.40.0, but don't trigger publication of packages, you can use the next qualifier (so it would be 1.40.0-next). You can read more about this approach in https://github.com/elastic/integrations/blob/ce78cfe4a13c14528bb88b809d7ed2789dd1b2ab/docs/developer_workflow_design_build_test_integration.md#remember-to-bump-up-the-version.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thank you for the clarifications on the process!

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
@elasticmachine
Copy link

elasticmachine commented May 16, 2023

💚 Build Succeeded

the below badges are clickable and redirect to their specific view in the CI or DOCS
Pipeline View Test View Changes Artifacts preview preview

Expand to view the summary

Build stats

  • Start Time: 2023-05-16T13:54:47.350+0000

  • Duration: 29 min 59 sec

Test stats 🧪

Test Results
Failed 0
Passed 92
Skipped 0
Total 92

🤖 GitHub comments

Expand to view the GitHub comments

To re-run your PR in the CI, just comment with:

  • /test : Re-trigger the build.

@elasticmachine
Copy link

elasticmachine commented May 16, 2023

🌐 Coverage report

Name Metrics % (covered/total) Diff
Packages 100.0% (0/0) 💚
Files 100.0% (0/0) 💚 10.87
Classes 100.0% (0/0) 💚 10.87
Methods 96.154% (75/78) 👍 7.324
Lines 100.0% (0/0) 💚 11.972
Conditionals 100.0% (0/0) 💚

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
constanca-m and others added 2 commits May 16, 2023 15:53
Co-authored-by: Jaime Soriano Pastor <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
Copy link
Contributor

@tetianakravchenko tetianakravchenko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Tested upgrade 1.39.0 to 1.40.0-beta.1 locally - corresponding visualizations do no have Sort field was not found. errors

@tetianakravchenko tetianakravchenko merged commit 2e7c914 into elastic:main May 17, 2023
@constanca-m constanca-m deleted the fix-k8s-dashboards branch May 17, 2023 07:53
@elasticmachine
Copy link

Package kubernetes - 1.40.0-beta.1 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=kubernetes

tetianakravchenko pushed a commit to tetianakravchenko/integrations that referenced this pull request May 17, 2023
…r dashboards (elastic#6221)

* Fix dashboards.

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>

* Update changelog.

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>

* Rollback state node.

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>

* Rollback container logs.

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>

* Update package version.

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>

* Update version.

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>

* Update packages/kubernetes/changelog.yml

Co-authored-by: Jaime Soriano Pastor <[email protected]>

* Update version.

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>

---------

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jaime Soriano Pastor <[email protected]>
tetianakravchenko added a commit that referenced this pull request May 17, 2023
…r dashboards (#6221) (#6237)

* Fix dashboards.



* Update changelog.



* Rollback state node.



* Rollback container logs.



* Update package version.



* Update version.



* Update packages/kubernetes/changelog.yml



* Update version.



---------

Signed-off-by: constanca-m <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Constança Manteigas <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jaime Soriano Pastor <[email protected]>
@elasticmachine
Copy link

Package kubernetes - 1.39.1 containing this change is available at https://epr.elastic.co/search?package=kubernetes

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants