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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
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
adding priority-class for esIndexCleaner #1732
adding priority-class for esIndexCleaner #1732
Changes from 15 commits
f9e8d67
f6ee0dd
bff72dd
91137fc
04166c4
c8fa1da
41825c8
801c5dc
f5b93ca
980c6c5
a7b3109
cbc24fd
324d061
6aee06d
d4f7147
9af705e
5b023b6
f7f292b
1b11bee
c3728f5
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
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.
Do we need this condition?
if the field is not empty, we update
priorityClassName
. But if its empty, we dont updatepriorityClassName
that is initialized with an empty string.means it is equal to just
priorityClassName := jaeger.Spec.Storage.EsIndexCleaner.PriorityClassName
right?Would it then make sense to assign it directly in the metav1 object?
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.
Agree on this 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.
Actually I looked at other parts of the code where priorityClass has been reference and this was the general approach followed elsewhere as well. Having to go with the same flow, I implemented the same set of changes
ref:
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.
Let me know if you guys wish to have the assignment in the metav1 object itself so that I can make the changes. Also let me know if you guys wish to have the same set of changes made at other places as well. If that be the case, should I do it in the same PR or create a new PR altogether??
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.
@rubenvp8510 / @frzifus : Guys, can you please share your inputs over 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.
Sorry for the long response. From my point of view it would make sense to change it at least in this pr. But feel free to change it on the other places too in this or a new pr. What do you think?
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.
Sure. Will make the necessary change only for the priorityClass which is part of this PR.
And would create a new PR for the other 2 PriorityClass.
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 would say only do the change related to this PR, we can do other changes in a separate PR
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.
still a bit confused, isnt it the same like?
up to you @rubenvp8510
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 agree with the change, but for not blocking this PR we can do the changes in a follow up PR.