-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 386
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[Flow-Aggregator] Add correlate fields and fix e2e tests with stats and network policy #1682
[Flow-Aggregator] Add correlate fields and fix e2e tests with stats and network policy #1682
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. Thanks for root causing it quickly.
As I already have the PR to do the merging of upstream/feature/flow-aggregator with upstream/master, additional commits on upstream/feature/flow-aggregator mean more massaging on the local branch--I already have one local commit fixing the flakiness.
Can you merge it with master and include the network policies in interNodeFlows to check for fixed correlation? You should wait for my PR to get merged with the master.
@@ -273,6 +273,9 @@ func (exp *flowExporter) sendFlowRecords() error { | |||
return err | |||
} | |||
} | |||
if err := exp.flowRecords.ValidateAndUpdateStats(key, record); err != nil { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Oh.. this was there before right? That is a good amount of logic missing :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yea.. I missed this part when changing the code.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## feature/flow-aggregator #1682 +/- ##
==========================================================
Coverage ? 40.34%
==========================================================
Files ? 107
Lines ? 13150
Branches ? 0
==========================================================
Hits ? 5306
Misses ? 7363
Partials ? 481
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. |
Sure. will add the network policy changes in e2e tests. |
0de8880
to
6d41413
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM - I assume we need to merge this before #1671?
This can go in after PR #1671. Bandwidth tests are being skipped with octetDeltaCount check and correlation of network policy fields is not being validated in current e2e tests. We need to validate those and check-in this change to master after merging PR #1671. |
If this PR fixes a bug in #1671, then we should amend #1671 with this commit (to avoid checking in broken code in master) |
Sure. I will then rebase with flow/aggregator branch after I fix the e2e tests problem for bandwidth. |
Sure a couple of ways to go about this. I am updating the upstream/feature/flow-aggregator branch with my commits and new rebased master commits. We can push this commit and use PR #1671 to merge everything. |
179a472
to
92b6976
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
This PR is a follow-up fix for bumping go-ipfix to v0.4.2 with following changes:
destinationServicePort
,egressNetworkPolicyName
andegressNetworkPolicyNamespace
in correlation fields