search

netobserv / flowlogs-pipeline

Transform flow logs into metrics
Apache License 2.0
75 stars 23 forks source link

NETOBSERV-1597: skip RecordKeyMissing error #660

Closed jpinsonneau closed 4 months ago

jpinsonneau commented 5 months ago

Description

Skip all RecordKeyMissing and consider these as 0 since we removed empty fields from eBPF agent.

https://github.com/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent/blob/release-1.5/pkg/decode/decode_protobuf.go#L61-L67

If this needs to be configurable for specific cases please let me know.

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

openshift-ci-robot commented 4 months ago

@jpinsonneau: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1597 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.16.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to [this](https://github.com/netobserv/flowlogs-pipeline/pull/660): >## Description > >Skip all `RecordKeyMissing` and consider these as `0` since we removed empty fields from eBPF agent. > >https://github.com/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent/blob/release-1.5/pkg/decode/decode_protobuf.go#L61-L67 > >If this needs to be configurable for specific cases please let me know. > >## Dependencies > >n/a > >## Checklist > >If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that. > >* [ ] Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist. >* [X] Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix _(in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes)._ >* [ ] Does this PR require product documentation? > * [ ] If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs. >* [ ] Does this PR require a product release notes entry? > * [ ] If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA. >* [ ] Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc. > * [ ] If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket. >* QE requirements (check 1 from the list): > * [X] Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise. > * [ ] Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change). > * [ ] No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team). > Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://prow.ci.openshift.org/command-help?repo=netobserv%2Fflowlogs-pipeline). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin](https://github.com/openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin/issues/new) repository.
github-actions[bot] commented 4 months ago

New image: quay.io/netobserv/flowlogs-pipeline:db58132

It will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build, run from the operator repo, assuming the operator is running:

USER=netobserv VERSION=db58132 make set-flp-image
codecov-commenter commented 4 months ago

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests :white_check_mark:

Project coverage is 66.49%. Comparing base (44438e7) to head (e806059). Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files ```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #660 +/- ## ========================================== - Coverage 66.52% 66.49% -0.04% ========================================== Files 104 104 Lines 6659 6658 -1 ========================================== - Hits 4430 4427 -3 - Misses 1915 1916 +1 - Partials 314 315 +1 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/netobserv/flowlogs-pipeline/pull/660/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=netobserv) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/netobserv/flowlogs-pipeline/pull/660/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=netobserv) | `66.49% <ø> (-0.04%)` | :arrow_down: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=netobserv#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

memodi commented 4 months ago

/label qe-approved

openshift-ci-robot commented 4 months ago

@jpinsonneau: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1597 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.17.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to [this](https://github.com/netobserv/flowlogs-pipeline/pull/660): >## Description > >Skip all `RecordKeyMissing` and consider these as `0` since we removed empty fields from eBPF agent. > >https://github.com/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent/blob/release-1.5/pkg/decode/decode_protobuf.go#L61-L67 > >If this needs to be configurable for specific cases please let me know. > >## Dependencies > >n/a > >## Checklist > >If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that. > >* [ ] Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist. >* [X] Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix _(in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes)._ >* [ ] Does this PR require product documentation? > * [ ] If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs. >* [ ] Does this PR require a product release notes entry? > * [ ] If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA. >* [ ] Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc. > * [ ] If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket. >* QE requirements (check 1 from the list): > * [X] Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise. > * [ ] Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change). > * [ ] No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team). > Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available [here](https://prow.ci.openshift.org/command-help?repo=netobserv%2Fflowlogs-pipeline). If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the [openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin](https://github.com/openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin/issues/new) repository.
jotak commented 4 months ago

thanks @memodi /approve

openshift-ci[bot] commented 4 months ago

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jotak

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: - ~~[OWNERS](https://github.com/netobserv/flowlogs-pipeline/blob/main/OWNERS)~~ [jotak] Approvers can indicate their approval by writing `/approve` in a comment Approvers can cancel approval by writing `/approve cancel` in a comment