Skip to content
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

Update UI to use new allocated ports fields #8631

Merged
merged 9 commits into from
Aug 20, 2020
Merged

Conversation

nickethier
Copy link
Member

In Nomad 0.12 a new field in the Allocation.AllocatedResources.Shared object was added which lists all allocated ports for the allocation and the associated host address. This PR updates the UI to use these new fields and removes references to task networks/ports since they are deprecated and will be removed.

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 10, 2020

Ember Asset Size action

As of cce6215

Files that got Bigger 🚨:

File raw gzip
nomad-ui.js +3.27 kB -87 B

Files that stayed the same size 🤷‍:

File raw gzip
vendor.js 0 B 0 B
nomad-ui.css 0 B 0 B
vendor.css 0 B 0 B

@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 10, 2020

Ember Test Audit comparison

master cce6215 change
passes 1379 1378 -1
failures 0 0 0
flaky 0 0 0
duration 7m 03s 477ms 6m 33s 782ms -29s 695ms

@nickethier nickethier marked this pull request as ready for review August 11, 2020 19:00
@DingoEatingFuzz
Copy link
Contributor

I'm recusing myself since we paired on this.

Copy link
Contributor

@backspace backspace left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I can’t comment on the Go but the Ember looks good! I pointed out a couple of stale page object properties but nothing serious.

const dynamicPorts = taskResources.resources.Networks[0].DynamicPorts;
const addresses = reservedPorts.concat(dynamicPorts);

assert.equal(Task.addresses.length, addresses.length, 'All addresses are listed');
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This could be addressed (😬) separately if there’s a time crunch but I think with the removal of these tests, the Task.addresses and .hasAddresses page objects can be deleted, I couldn’t find anywhere else they were used.

{{/each}}
{{/let}}
</ul>
</td>
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pretty unimportant but this means the corresponding tasks.ports property in tests/pages/allocations/detail can be deleted. I feel like there are probably several existing orphaned page objects properties though as we don’t have a good way to detect things we aren’t using anymore.

@backspace
Copy link
Contributor

hieeeeee in #8634 I have a serialiser abstraction that is (minorly) useful in this PR, could be nice to have this merged so I can update that before merging, let me know if there’s something I can contribute to get this merged? I could, for instance, make the deletions I suggested above.

@nickethier nickethier removed the request for review from DingoEatingFuzz August 20, 2020 04:18
@nickethier
Copy link
Member Author

Hey @backspace could you take one more look to make sure I removed everything you mentioned.

@nickethier nickethier requested a review from backspace August 20, 2020 04:25
Copy link
Contributor

@backspace backspace left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

great, yes, thanks for removing those!! 🥳

@github-actions
Copy link

I'm going to lock this pull request because it has been closed for 120 days ⏳. This helps our maintainers find and focus on the active contributions.
If you have found a problem that seems related to this change, please open a new issue and complete the issue template so we can capture all the details necessary to investigate further.

@github-actions github-actions bot locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Dec 21, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants