Cleanup receiver group resources #167
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
getName already checks the optional suffix
This is transparent because: * getName does not use receiverGroup from receiverInstance, and * receiverExt is embedded in receiverInstance
instead of calling r.GetObjectMeta(r.getName(...)) all over the place, extract it into a method
the hashring config map does not depend on a specific receiver group
commonService was only called on receiverInstance's with receiverGroup set to nil, so there was no dependency on the receiverGroup
Also fix a typo and a missing override application
pepov
approved these changes
Dec 6, 2021
tarokkk
approved these changes
Dec 6, 2021
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What's in this PR?
Use the NativeReconciler from operator-tools to handle the removal of no longer needed resources created for receiver groups.
Also, refactored some of the operator's code to make it simpler.
Why?
See #146.