Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
imho the metadata should only be used for informational features such as labelling and status and not for CRUD of k8s resources.
one way to handle deletes could be for the infra manager to reconcile all k8s resources owned by this infra manager (tied to a single GW Class), and delete those resources that are not part of the Translate o/p
There was a problem hiding this comment.
IMO infra IR metadata should include a deletionTimestamp that is set by the Resource Translator when the associated Gateway is deleted. An infra IR with deletionTimestamp tells the Infra Manager to delete the associated infra.
one way to handle deletes could be for the infra manager to reconcile all k8s resources owned by this infra manager (tied to a single GW Class), and delete those resources that are not part of the Translate o/p
Yes, this is a possible solution but IMO not as efficient as it requires a List() and then Delete().
internal/infrastructure/manager.go
Outdated
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Do we expect there to multiple things here? Before I got to this file, I was assuming Manager was going to be an interface that kubernetes.Infra implements.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, the struct will contain a field for every supported provider. I created #182 to track the need to move this to an interface.
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #178 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 61.74% 60.16% -1.59%
==========================================
Files 20 23 +3
Lines 1814 1993 +179
==========================================
+ Hits 1120 1199 +79
- Misses 632 722 +90
- Partials 62 72 +10
Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: this line is unnecessary
Signed-off-by: danehans <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: danehans <[email protected]>
Adds initial Infra Manager implementation.
Requires: #183
xref: #41
Signed-off-by: danehans [email protected]