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

batch - support integration-name instead of integration-ID #32

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 19, 2023

Conversation

OrNovo
Copy link
Contributor

@OrNovo OrNovo commented Jul 18, 2023

e.g. -

integrationName: WebhookAlerts instead of integrationID: 2235

@OrNovo OrNovo marked this pull request as ready for review July 18, 2023 23:28
@OrNovo OrNovo requested a review from a team as a code owner July 18, 2023 23:28
@OrNovo
Copy link
Contributor Author

OrNovo commented Jul 19, 2023

@nicolastakashi I guess charts also have to be updated?

@nicolastakashi
Copy link
Collaborator

@nicolastakashi I guess charts also have to be updated?

We need to update the CRDs and also the Image version.
Worth we have a task to automate this soon

@OrNovo
Copy link
Contributor Author

OrNovo commented Jul 19, 2023

@nicolastakashi I guess charts also have to be updated?

We need to update the CRDs and also the Image version. Worth we have a task to automate this soon

so to leave it to different PR?

Copy link
Contributor

@ArthurSens ArthurSens left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Awesome Or, thanks for tackling this one!

I left a few comments regarding error handling. It should be good to merge after that

@ArthurSens
Copy link
Contributor

Also food for thought for a future improvement, we could avoid multiple calls to the webhook API if we do a single one when the operator is initializing and cache those webhooks in memory.

The operator itself can provide the webhook IDs, instead of calling the Webhook API once per Alert resource

@OrNovo
Copy link
Contributor Author

OrNovo commented Jul 19, 2023

Also food for thought for a future improvement, we could avoid multiple calls to the webhook API if we do a single one when the operator is initializing and cache those webhooks in memory.

The operator itself can provide the webhook IDs, instead of calling the Webhook API once per Alert resource

TBH I'm not a big fan of handling states inside the operator, but I guess we won't have a choice.

@OrNovo OrNovo reopened this Jul 19, 2023
Copy link
Contributor

@ArthurSens ArthurSens left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Awesome Or! Thanks for tackling this so quickly

I've added just a few more comments, but they are non-blocking. Feel free to merge or to address them, it is up to you :)

@OrNovo OrNovo merged commit 0e5b0d3 into main Jul 19, 2023
9 checks passed
@OrNovo OrNovo deleted the support_integration_name_instead_of_integration_Id branch July 19, 2023 17:03
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