NETOBSERV-1649: Improve UX and cases managed with prometheus

[jotak]

• Automatically switch to PktDropBytes/Packets metrics when there's a drop cause/state filter
• Make topology queries less strict on fetching drops for decoration: an error will not break the whole thing anymore
  • Display warning when that happens
• small refactoring related to warning message and details

Description

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.

• 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):
  • 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).

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jotak: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1649 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 story to target the "4.17.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

• Automatically switch to PktDropBytes/Packets metrics when there's a drop cause/state filter
• Make topology queries less strict on fetching drops for decoration: an error will not break the whole thing anymore
• Display warning when that happens
• small refactoring related to warning message and details

Description

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.

• 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):
• 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. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from jotak. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jotak: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1649 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 story to target the "4.17.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

• Automatically switch to PktDropBytes/Packets metrics when there's a drop cause/state filter
• Make topology queries less strict on fetching drops for decoration: an error will not break the whole thing anymore
• Display warning when that happens
• small refactoring related to warning message and details

Description

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.

• 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):
• 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. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jotak: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1649 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 story to target the "4.17.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

• Automatically switch to PktDropBytes/Packets metrics when there's a drop cause/state filter
• Make topology queries less strict on fetching drops for decoration: an error will not break the whole thing anymore
• Display warning when that happens
• small refactoring related to warning message and details

Description

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.

• 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):
• 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. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 24.32432% with 28 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 56.10%. Comparing base (1a710ec) to head (42bf1b0).

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #549      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   56.21%   56.10%   -0.12%     
==========================================
  Files         183      183              
  Lines        9081     9098      +17     
  Branches     1183     1185       +2     
==========================================
- Hits         5105     5104       -1     
- Misses       3605     3623      +18     
  Partials      371      371              

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	57.37% <24.13%> (-0.11%)	⬇️
unittests	52.54% <25.00%> (-0.14%)	⬇️

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

Files	Coverage Δ
pkg/model/fields/fields.go	88.88% <ø> (ø)
web/src/components/messages/error.tsx	19.73% <ø> (ø)
...ents/query-summary/flows-query-summary-content.tsx	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...c/components/query-summary/flows-query-summary.tsx	90.00% <ø> (ø)
...ts/query-summary/metrics-query-summary-content.tsx	62.50% <ø> (ø)
...components/query-summary/metrics-query-summary.tsx	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...c/components/query-summary/stats-query-summary.tsx	100.00% <ø> (ø)
...components/query-summary/summary-panel-content.tsx	42.74% <ø> (ø)
web/src/components/query-summary/summary-panel.tsx	100.00% <ø> (ø)
pkg/prometheus/inventory.go	62.66% <25.00%> (-5.45%)	⬇️
... and 1 more

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

[memodi]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-console-plugin:f8c7c2a

It will expire after two weeks.

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

USER=netobserv VERSION=f8c7c2a make set-plugin-image

[jotak]

(rebased)

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-console-plugin:3d32371

It will expire after two weeks.

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

USER=netobserv VERSION=3d32371 make set-plugin-image

[memodi]

@jotak - with this PR it looks good overall, can you clarify what do you mean when you say?

Automatically switch to PktDropBytes/Packets metrics when there's a drop cause/state filter

is it to say we'll display dropped bytes/packets on topology edges when there's a match drop cause/state filter?

no topology view since drop state didn't match probably?:

[jotak]

@jotak - with this PR it looks good overall, can you clarify what do you mean when you say?

Automatically switch to PktDropBytes/Packets metrics when there's a drop cause/state filter

is it to say we'll display dropped bytes/packets on topology edges when there's a match drop cause/state filter?

Yes ... and while saying this, I realize this is probably not correct, at least not in every case.. Argh! Need to think more about that.
E.g. for an "equal" filter, this should give the expected result I think, but for a "not equal" it will show all drops that don't have the given cause/state; whereas we'd expect everything that don't have the given cause/state, ie. including non-drops.

no topology view since drop state didn't match probably?:

I guess yes. A way to confirm this is to install loki and switch between forced Loki / Prom datasources

[jotak]

@memodi I think I'll open another bug for the issue spotted. It sounds tricky to fix. But I wouldn't want to block this PR for that, because it makes an improvement overall

=> https://issues.redhat.com/browse/NETOBSERV-1740

[memodi]

SGTM. thanks! I'll add comment for NETOBSERV-1740
/label qe-approved

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jotak: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1649 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 story to target the "4.17.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

• Automatically switch to PktDropBytes/Packets metrics when there's a drop cause/state filter
• Make topology queries less strict on fetching drops for decoration: an error will not break the whole thing anymore
• Display warning when that happens
• small refactoring related to warning message and details

Description

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.

• 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):
• 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. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[jpinsonneau]

Code looks good ! Thanks @jotak !

I hope we'll not have too much conflicts with #551 since I changed a lot of files there. Feel free to merge first if needed.

[openshift-ci]

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

[jotak]

(rebased)

[jotak]

thanks @jpinsonneau .. sorry for the conflicts 😨
I want to merge it to fix some issues for my workshop