NETOBSERV-1017 extract timebased indexKeys

[jpinsonneau]

In order to get top Pod / Service talkers this PR implements IndexKeys as an array for timebased stage.

It also add the capability to index on non string fields using ConvertToString utils

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #450 (25842d7) into main (7dde343) will increase coverage by 3.27%.
The diff coverage is 70.88%.

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #450      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   62.85%   66.12%   +3.27%     
==========================================
  Files          96       94       -2     
  Lines        6916     6867      -49     
==========================================
+ Hits         4347     4541     +194     
+ Misses       2325     2066     -259     
- Partials      244      260      +16     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	66.12% <70.88%> (+3.27%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
pkg/api/extract_timebased.go	100.00% <ø> (ø)
pkg/utils/convert.go	73.70% <27.27%> (-5.35%)	⬇️
pkg/pipeline/extract/timebased/timebased.go	82.05% <50.00%> (-9.13%)	⬇️
pkg/pipeline/extract/timebased/tables.go	83.01% <86.95%> (-0.32%)	⬇️
pkg/pipeline/extract/timebased/filters.go	84.54% <100.00%> (+0.73%)	⬆️
pkg/test/utils.go	74.49% <100.00%> (+1.83%)	⬆️

... and 10 files with indirect coverage changes

[KalmanMeth]

Could't we use fmt.Sprintf(%v) to convert anything to a string?

[jpinsonneau]

sounds good, b8cc564

[KalmanMeth]

Once you've added in the individual fields, I don't see the need to keep the key, operation_key, and operation_result fields.

[jpinsonneau]

Yes exactly; done in 25842d7

[jpinsonneau]

Thanks @KalmanMeth 🥳

[jpinsonneau]

/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jpinsonneau

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 [jpinsonneau]

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

[jotak]

@KalmanMeth @jpinsonneau should we mark that as a breaking change? (the API is preserved however the output fields are different if I understand correctly (operation_key and operation_result being removed)

I'm not concerned for netobserv, but other FLP users

[jpinsonneau]

@KalmanMeth @jpinsonneau should we mark that as a breaking change? (the API is preserved however the output fields are different if I understand correctly (operation_key and operation_result being removed)

I'm not concerned for netobserv, but other FLP users

Added the label on that PR. Check #450 (comment) discussion

[KalmanMeth]

@jpinsonneau For completeness we should mark it as a breaking change (although you did maintain back compatibility for the current implementation, indicating deprecation).