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

UI - Bugfixes multi nodes - high availability #3521

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Sep 3, 2021

Conversation

JBWatenbergScality
Copy link
Contributor

Component:

UI

Context:

When a nodes is unavailable the UI reported wrong / incomplete information.

  • All the volumes where listed for all the nodes instead of filtering only the volumes of the selected node in the volumes tab of node detail pane
  • The deploy button was displayed when a node is unavailable but has already been deployed
  • An incorrect node status (unknown) was reported in the node table when a node is unavailable

@JBWatenbergScality JBWatenbergScality requested a review from a team as a code owner September 2, 2021 09:04
@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 2, 2021

Hello jbwatenbergscality,

My role is to assist you with the merge of this
pull request. Please type @bert-e help to get information
on this process, or consult the user documentation.

Status report is not available.

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 2, 2021

Integration data created

I have created the integration data for the additional destination branches.

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/2.0
  • development/2.1
  • development/2.2
  • development/2.3
  • development/2.4
  • development/2.5
  • development/2.6
  • development/2.7
  • development/2.8
  • development/2.9

You can set option create_pull_requests if you need me to create
integration pull requests in addition to integration branches, with:

@bert-e create_pull_requests

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 2, 2021

Waiting for approval

The following approvals are needed before I can proceed with the merge:

  • the author

  • one peer

Peer approvals must include at least 1 approval from the following list:

Comment on lines +128 to +132
const alertsNode = ((alertList && alertList.alerts) || []).filter(
(alert) =>
alert.labels.instance === `${instanceIP}:${PORT_NODE_EXPORTER}` ||
alert.labels.node === name,
);
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I am wondering why can't we add this filter within useAlerts() ?

  const alertList = useAlerts({
    alertname: NODE_ALERTS_GROUP,
    instance: `${instanceIP}:${PORT_NODE_EXPORTER}`,
   node: name
  });

Copy link
Contributor Author

@JBWatenbergScality JBWatenbergScality Sep 2, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That would make an AND filter and then exclude the Alerts with label instance: ${instanceIP}:${PORT_NODE_EXPORTER} if the node label is not defined.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Oh. Yes, that's right.. I miss the OR logic in the filter..
Look good to me then!

@JBWatenbergScality
Copy link
Contributor Author

/approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 3, 2021

Build failed

The build for commit did not succeed in branch w/2.11/bugfix/volume-info-retrieval.

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 3, 2021

Build failed

The build for commit did not succeed in branch w/2.11/bugfix/volume-info-retrieval.

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 3, 2021

In the queue

The changeset has received all authorizations and has been added to the
relevant queue(s). The queue(s) will be merged in the target development
branch(es) as soon as builds have passed.

The changeset will be merged in:

  • ✔️ development/2.10

  • ✔️ development/2.11

The following branches will NOT be impacted:

  • development/2.0
  • development/2.1
  • development/2.2
  • development/2.3
  • development/2.4
  • development/2.5
  • development/2.6
  • development/2.7
  • development/2.8
  • development/2.9

There is no action required on your side. You will be notified here once
the changeset has been merged. In the unlikely event that the changeset
fails permanently on the queue, a member of the admin team will
contact you to help resolve the matter.

IMPORTANT

Please do not attempt to modify this pull request.

  • Any commit you add on the source branch will trigger a new cycle after the
    current queue is merged.
  • Any commit you add on one of the integration branches will be lost.

If you need this pull request to be removed from the queue, please contact a
member of the admin team now.

The following options are set: approve

@bert-e
Copy link
Contributor

bert-e commented Sep 3, 2021

I have successfully merged the changeset of this pull request
into targetted development branches:

  • ✔️ development/2.10

  • ✔️ development/2.11

The following branches have NOT changed:

  • development/2.0
  • development/2.1
  • development/2.2
  • development/2.3
  • development/2.4
  • development/2.5
  • development/2.6
  • development/2.7
  • development/2.8
  • development/2.9

Please check the status of the associated issue None.

Goodbye jbwatenbergscality.

@bert-e bert-e merged commit 012fcf3 into development/2.10 Sep 3, 2021
@bert-e bert-e deleted the bugfix/volume-info-retrieval branch September 3, 2021 12:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants