🐛 fix the placement decision clusters have random order issue #235
Conversation
|
/assign @qiujian16 |
Codecov ReportPatch coverage:
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #235 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 60.29% 60.29% -0.01%
==========================================
Files 131 131
Lines 13543 13540 -3
==========================================
- Hits 8166 8164 -2
+ Misses 4625 4623 -2
- Partials 752 753 +1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
/approve /assign @zhujian7 |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: haoqing0110, qiujian16 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
| for _, cluster := range clusterNames.UnsortedList() { | ||
| clusterNameList := clusterNameSet.UnsortedList() | ||
| sort.Strings(clusterNameList) | ||
| for _, cluster := range clusterNameList { | ||
| matched = append(matched, clusterapiv1beta1.ClusterDecision{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure if sorting the matched is better, because if the matched gets some results from matched, status := filterClustersBySelector(d.ClusterSelector, clusters, clusterNameSet), are they in order？
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Good suggestion. Need to sort all the matched before dividing into groups.
haoqing0110
force-pushed
the
br_placement-test
branch
2 times, most recently
from
395eedf to
6abe010
Compare
|
/lgtm |
Signed-off-by: haoqing0110 <qhao@redhat.com>
haoqing0110
force-pushed
the
br_placement-test
branch
from
6abe010 to
de571d1
Compare
|
/lgtm |
Summary
Related issue(s)
Fixes #233