Create service for extensions #3403
Conversation
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
from
df4a731
to
3a5a2ee
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
from
3a5a2ee
to
3ab8c98
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d742325
to
eb14bf7
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
from
eb14bf7
to
5f26d14
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
6 times, most recently
from
007c7eb
to
d9ff5df
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
2 times, most recently
from
41da859
to
5e26224
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
from
5e26224
to
4f27a6b
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I wanted to be clearer about how I'd like the e2e test you added to look like. I'm including some suggestions to help demonstrate that. Fundamentally, the manifests we assert against should only contain attributes that are relevant to this specific test.
The rest of this PR looks good to me, nicely done. 👍
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
2 times, most recently
from
c5d4b40
to
effe1d9
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
2 times, most recently
from
d25d89a
to
0091576
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
from
0091576
to
b90db6c
Compare
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
2 times, most recently
from
be77545
to
6751006
Compare
Signed-off-by: Ankit152 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ankit152 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ankit152 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Ankit152 <[email protected]>
Ankit152
force-pushed
the
service-extension
branch
from
6751006
to
c3ebb64
Compare
| "endpoint": "0.0.0.0:16686", | ||
| }, | ||
| "grpc": map[string]interface{}{ | ||
| "endpoint": "0.0.0.0:16686", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
wouldnt we expect grpc and http to not share an endpoint?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes, in most cases, but Jaeger does allow sharing the port between http/grpc.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
don't know if that was intentional in the test though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actually, jaeger-query won't be using GRPC endpoint in OTEL Operator. I have intentionally kept that to see if it is throwing an error or not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
got it, @yurishkuro would you mind reviewing this and then i can merge it in?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@jaronoff97 you should not block on my review - I know nothing about how operators are implemented internally, and this change is about that, not about any Jaeger knowledge, so my review would be completely superficial.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i mostly wanted the jaeger knowledge and the superficial ✔️ just to close out the comments you left from before. but no problem, thanks for letting me know :)
|
@Ankit152 thank you for your contribution!! 🙇 |
|
Thank you very much everyone for the kind feedback and reviews! 🙇🏼 |
Description:
The Otel Operator doesn't creates a service for extensions. This will help the operator to create Service for extensions which will be consumed by an Ingress so that users can interact with it directly. This is related to deployment of Jaeger V2 in k8s.
Link to tracking Issue(s):
Testing:
Documentation: