Skip to content

fix: Set missing fields during update cluster configuration #89

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

Merged

Conversation

michaelhtm
Copy link
Member

@michaelhtm michaelhtm commented May 6, 2025

Issue #2219

Description of changes:
Set missing fields during domain update operation

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

@ack-prow ack-prow bot requested review from jlbutler and knottnt May 6, 2025 05:10
@ack-prow ack-prow bot added the approved label May 6, 2025
@michaelhtm michaelhtm force-pushed the fix/setresourcesandwait branch 6 times, most recently from 1173b5f to 0304444 Compare May 6, 2025 22:38
@michaelhtm
Copy link
Member Author

/retest

@michaelhtm michaelhtm force-pushed the fix/setresourcesandwait branch from 0304444 to 69f014a Compare May 7, 2025 23:13
}

func isAutoTuneOptionAvailable(autoTuneOption *svcapitypes.AutoTuneOptionsInput) bool {
if autoTuneOption == nil {
Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Q: What is meant by "Available" here? It seems odd that something would be considered available when something is nil or disabled.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this function is just another form of isAutoTuneOptionReady which accepts the svcsdktypes.AutotuneOptionsOutput.

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is this more of an overload of isAutoTuneOptionReady where the semantic meaning is the same or does it mean something different for AutoTune to be available vs ready?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

There's no difference really. Just needed to use it with different structs. removing isAutoTuneOptionAvailable to avoid confusion.

@michaelhtm michaelhtm force-pushed the fix/setresourcesandwait branch 2 times, most recently from 43b1cf9 to e69ba89 Compare May 8, 2025 21:39
@michaelhtm
Copy link
Member Author

/test opensearchservice-kind-e2e

1 similar comment
@michaelhtm
Copy link
Member Author

/test opensearchservice-kind-e2e

Copy link
Member

@rushmash91 rushmash91 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Nice @michaelhtm ! left a few comments

@michaelhtm michaelhtm force-pushed the fix/setresourcesandwait branch from e69ba89 to c29f212 Compare May 9, 2025 21:41
@michaelhtm michaelhtm changed the title fix: Set extra fields fix: Set missing fields during update cluster configuration May 9, 2025
Co-Authored-By: Andrei Charviakou <[email protected]>
@michaelhtm michaelhtm force-pushed the fix/setresourcesandwait branch from c29f212 to 0a1fb39 Compare May 9, 2025 23:00
Copy link

ack-prow bot commented May 9, 2025

@michaelhtm: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
opensearchservice-verify-attribution 0a1fb39 link false /test opensearchservice-verify-attribution

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

@rushmash91
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@ack-prow ack-prow bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label May 12, 2025
Copy link

ack-prow bot commented May 12, 2025

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: michaelhtm, rushmash91

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 [michaelhtm,rushmash91]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@ack-prow ack-prow bot merged commit 24dc713 into aws-controllers-k8s:main May 12, 2025
6 of 7 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants