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

cleanup: don't return an internal type from VolumeGroupJournal.Connect() #4491

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Mar 14, 2024

Conversation

nixpanic
Copy link
Member

The VolumeGroupJournal interface does not need to return anything except for a potential error. Any instance that implements the VolumeGroupJournal interface can be used to call all functions.


Show available bot commands

These commands are normally not required, but in case of issues, leave any of
the following bot commands in an otherwise empty comment in this PR:

  • /retest ci/centos/<job-name>: retest the <job-name> after unrelated
    failure (please report the failure too!)

@nixpanic nixpanic requested a review from Madhu-1 March 12, 2024 17:05
@nixpanic nixpanic added the ci/skip/e2e skip running e2e CI jobs label Mar 12, 2024
@mergify mergify bot added the cleanup label Mar 12, 2024
@@ -115,14 +115,14 @@ func (sgj *volumeGroupJournalConfig) Connect(
monitors,
namespace string,
cr *util.Credentials,
) (*volumeGroupJournalConfig, error) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we might get into problem when we serve many requests for different pools because all the journaling interface are initialized once and when are using different pool or ceph users we get connection for each one and that's the reason for returning which helps in initializing the connections, we cannot call Connect for same global object from multiple places. for now lets keep this and adjust it later or remove connect from the interface and modify it to take the input struct and return interface from it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Currently it returns a pointer to itself, not a new instance of volumeGroupJournalConfig.

Why would someone not create multiple VolumeGroupJournal instances for different pools? If the connection/credentials to the Ceph cluster are the same, they will share the ClusterConnection already.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

probably we might need to address it when required, For now approving it as there is no consumer of this yet

@nixpanic nixpanic requested a review from Madhu-1 March 13, 2024 14:09
@@ -115,14 +115,14 @@ func (sgj *volumeGroupJournalConfig) Connect(
monitors,
namespace string,
cr *util.Credentials,
) (*volumeGroupJournalConfig, error) {
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

probably we might need to address it when required, For now approving it as there is no consumer of this yet

@Madhu-1 Madhu-1 requested a review from a team March 13, 2024 14:14
@nixpanic
Copy link
Member Author

@Mergifyio queue

Copy link
Contributor

mergify bot commented Mar 14, 2024

queue

✅ The pull request has been merged automatically

The pull request has been merged automatically at 32de268

The VolumeGroupJournal interface does not need to return anything except
for a potential error. Any instance that implements the
VolumeGroupJournal interface can be used to call all functions.

Signed-off-by: Niels de Vos <ndevos@ibm.com>
@nixpanic nixpanic force-pushed the cleanup/VolumeGroupJournal.Connect branch from 06f098e to 4f9ece6 Compare March 14, 2024 10:12
@mergify mergify bot added the ok-to-test Label to trigger E2E tests label Mar 14, 2024
@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/k8s-e2e-external-storage/1.27

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/upgrade-tests-cephfs

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e-helm/k8s-1.27

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/upgrade-tests-rbd

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/k8s-e2e-external-storage/1.29

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e/k8s-1.27

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e-helm/k8s-1.29

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/k8s-e2e-external-storage/1.28

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e/k8s-1.29

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e-helm/k8s-1.28

@ceph-csi-bot
Copy link
Collaborator

/test ci/centos/mini-e2e/k8s-1.28

@ceph-csi-bot ceph-csi-bot removed the ok-to-test Label to trigger E2E tests label Mar 14, 2024
@mergify mergify bot merged commit 32de268 into ceph:devel Mar 14, 2024
34 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ci/skip/e2e skip running e2e CI jobs cleanup
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants