📖 Fix Client Read/Write Functionality Comments #2647
Conversation
|
Welcome @fxierh! |
k8s-ci-robot
added
cncf-cla: no
|
Hi @fxierh. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
size/S
|
/easycla |
k8s-ci-robot
added
cncf-cla: yes
pkg/client/client.go
Outdated
| // (it doesn't use object caches). It understands how to work with | ||
| // normal types (both custom resources and aggregated/built-in resources), | ||
| // as well as unstructured types. | ||
| // The returned client reads from a local cache or directly from the API server, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is this or intentional? Did the previous client not only read directly from the apiserver?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Never mind, I see that if you set options.Cache it will read from the cache and not directly from the api server. However the default case would return a client that reads directly from the api-server.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @troy0820, thanks for the comments. The objective is to disambiguate the code comments and to reflect that the read could be performed on a local cache (and not necessarily on the API server).
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you explain in the comment in which cases a cached client is returned? (By referring to the options passed to this function)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@inteon Thanks for pointing this out. The comment is updated accordingly. Could you please take another look ?
|
/assign @inteon @joelanford Would you please take a look when you get a chance? Thanks. |
|
/ok-to-test |
k8s-ci-robot
added
ok-to-test
|
@fxierh: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
Perfect. Thank you very much! /lgtm |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: fxierh, sbueringer 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 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
To be honest, I actually prefer the previous delegation model that was removed by #2150, which had better separation of concern and well-defined behaviour. |
Fix comments related to the read/write functionality of the client to reflect that the client reads from a local cache or API server, and writes directly to the API server.