NETOBSERV-1217: Added flag to enable multiCluster configuration

[OlivierCazade]

Description

• ensure cluster id is Loki label
• don't append it if not in multicluster environment

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]

@OlivierCazade: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1217 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 "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Description

• ensure cluster id is Loki label
• don't append it if not in multicluster environment

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 kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: 79 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (58e2e2a) 62.56% compared to head (13c0e7e) 62.58%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...ntrollers/flowlogspipeline/flp_pipeline_builder.go	80.17%	61 Missing and 7 partials ⚠️
api/v1beta1/zz_generated.deepcopy.go	0.00%	5 Missing ⚠️
controllers/flowlogspipeline/flp_common_objects.go	92.00%	3 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
controllers/flowlogspipeline/flp_ingest_objects.go	83.33%	1 Missing ⚠️
...ntrollers/flowlogspipeline/flp_monolith_objects.go	85.71%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #482      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   62.56%   62.58%   +0.02%     
==========================================
  Files          55       56       +1     
  Lines        6822     6831       +9     
==========================================
+ Hits         4268     4275       +7     
- Misses       2238     2241       +3     
+ Partials      316      315       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	62.58% <81.41%> (+0.02%)	⬆️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[jotak]

/lgtm

[nathan-weinberg]

/hold for pre-merge testing

[nathan-weinberg]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New images:

• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator:f97c38f
• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-bundle:v0.0.0-f97c38f
• quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-catalog:v0.0.0-f97c38f

They will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build:

# Direct deployment, from operator repo
IMAGE=quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator:f97c38f make deploy

# Or using operator-sdk
operator-sdk run bundle quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-bundle:v0.0.0-f97c38f

Or as a Catalog Source:

apiVersion: operators.coreos.com/v1alpha1
kind: CatalogSource
metadata:
  name: netobserv-dev
  namespace: openshift-marketplace
spec:
  sourceType: grpc
  image: quay.io/netobserv/network-observability-operator-catalog:v0.0.0-f97c38f
  displayName: NetObserv development catalog
  publisher: Me
  updateStrategy:
    registryPoll:
      interval: 1m

[nathan-weinberg]

/unhold

[nathan-weinberg]

/label qe-approved

[openshift-ci-robot]

@OlivierCazade: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1217 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 "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Description

• ensure cluster id is Loki label
• don't append it if not in multicluster environment

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 kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[OlivierCazade]

/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: OlivierCazade

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 [OlivierCazade]

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