Skip to content

Add exception handler to SharedInformerFactory#1992

Merged
k8s-ci-robot merged 2 commits intokubernetes-client:masterfrom
cbuschka:issue1629_extend_exception_handling_from_shared_informer_factory
Nov 24, 2021
Merged

Add exception handler to SharedInformerFactory#1992
k8s-ci-robot merged 2 commits intokubernetes-client:masterfrom
cbuschka:issue1629_extend_exception_handling_from_shared_informer_factory

Conversation

@cbuschka
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@cbuschka cbuschka commented Nov 16, 2021

No description provided.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 16, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Nov 16, 2021

Thanks for your pull request. Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

📝 Please follow instructions at https://git.k8s.io/community/CLA.md#the-contributor-license-agreement to sign the CLA.

It may take a couple minutes for the CLA signature to be fully registered; after that, please reply here with a new comment and we'll verify. Thanks.

  • If you've already signed a CLA, it's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address. Check your existing CLA data and verify that your email is set on your git commits.
  • If you signed the CLA as a corporation, please sign in with your organization's credentials at https://identity.linuxfoundation.org/projects/cncf to be authorized.
  • If you have done the above and are still having issues with the CLA being reported as unsigned, please log a ticket with the Linux Foundation Helpdesk: https://support.linuxfoundation.org/
  • Should you encounter any issues with the Linux Foundation Helpdesk, send a message to the backup e-mail support address at: [email protected]
Details

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 16, 2021
@cbuschka cbuschka closed this Nov 16, 2021
@cbuschka cbuschka reopened this Nov 16, 2021
@cbuschka
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

cbuschka commented Nov 16, 2021

Relates to issue #1629

@cbuschka cbuschka mentioned this pull request Nov 16, 2021
Closed
@cbuschka
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

cbuschka commented Nov 17, 2021

/check-cla

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. and removed cncf-cla: no Indicates the PR's author has not signed the CNCF CLA. labels Nov 17, 2021
brendandburns
brendandburns reviewed Nov 17, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment thread util/src/main/java/io/kubernetes/client/informer/cache/Controller.java
@brendandburns
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

brendandburns commented Nov 17, 2021

This looks reasonable to me. Can you add unit tests to ensure we don't regress in the future?

Thanks!

@cbuschka
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

cbuschka commented Nov 17, 2021 •
edited
Loading

@brendandburns Sorry for the confusion. Could you please link this pr to issue #1629. In #1629 (comment) I wanted to give @domainname the chance to confirm that this change will solve his problem. Sure it lacks reasonable default value handling, tests, and a little love ;) Will add it.

@brendandburns brendandburns linked an issue Nov 17, 2021 that may be closed by this pull request
Difficult to extend exception handler #1629
Closed
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 17, 2021
@cbuschka cbuschka force-pushed the issue1629_extend_exception_handling_from_shared_informer_factory branch 2 times, most recently from 66aa670 to 86f9e10 Compare November 18, 2021 06:44
@cbuschka cbuschka force-pushed the issue1629_extend_exception_handling_from_shared_informer_factory branch from 86f9e10 to eb8e28b Compare November 18, 2021 06:46
@cbuschka cbuschka marked this pull request as ready for review November 18, 2021 07:07
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Nov 18, 2021
cbuschka
cbuschka commented Nov 18, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment thread util/src/main/java/io/kubernetes/client/informer/cache/Controller.java
cbuschka
cbuschka commented Nov 18, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment thread util/src/main/java/io/kubernetes/client/informer/cache/Controller.java

/* visible for testing */ BiConsumer<Class<ApiType>, Throwable> exceptionHandler;

public Controller(
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@cbuschka cbuschka Nov 18, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I am not sure if these constructor chains are a good strategy long term. The best option I currently see is

  • add a builder for the class
  • use the all params constructor from the builder
  • deprecate all constructors with partial param sets

Also I would try to get rid of the many new calls here via factories. This could improve testability and introduce entry points for people who want to influence behaviour. A larger change but could be done in baby steps. What do you think @brendandburns ?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@brendandburns brendandburns Nov 18, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you file this as an issue so we can have a broader discussion? I want to get @yue9944882 to weigh in as well.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@cbuschka cbuschka Nov 18, 2021

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yay, have created issue #1995 for discussion. Looking forward to if :)

@cbuschka
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

cbuschka commented Nov 18, 2021

@brendandburns Now it is ready for review. Could you take a look into it, please. I have added some comments. But they are more kind of a discussion. Is there a place to discuss issues?

brendandburns
brendandburns reviewed Nov 18, 2021
View reviewed changes
Comment thread util/src/test/java/io/kubernetes/client/informer/cache/ReflectorRunnableTest.java Outdated
@brendandburns
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

brendandburns commented Nov 18, 2021

This looks good to me, but would like @yue9944882 to look at the test refactor to make sure we didn't lose any coverage.

@cbuschka cbuschka mentioned this pull request Nov 18, 2021
Closed
yue9944882
yue9944882 reviewed Nov 24, 2021
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@yue9944882 yue9944882 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 24, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

k8s-ci-robot commented Nov 24, 2021

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: cbuschka, yue9944882

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

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 24, 2021
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 0642e7b into kubernetes-client:master Nov 24, 2021
@cbuschka cbuschka deleted the issue1629_extend_exception_handling_from_shared_informer_factory branch November 24, 2021 06:40
@cbuschka cbuschka mentioned this pull request Dec 14, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@brendandburns brendandburns brendandburns left review comments

@yue9944882 yue9944882 yue9944882 left review comments

Assignees

@yue9944882 yue9944882

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XL Denotes a PR that changes 500-999 lines, ignoring generated files.

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Difficult to extend exception handler

4 participants

@cbuschka @k8s-ci-robot @brendandburns @yue9944882