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

addressing client changes due to adding tenantId in the apis #3474

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 31, 2025

Conversation

dhrubo-os
Copy link
Collaborator

Description

[addressing client changes due to adding tenantId in the apis]

Related Issues

Resolves #[Issue number to be closed when this PR is merged]

Check List

  • New functionality includes testing.
  • New functionality has been documented.
  • API changes companion pull request created.
  • Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff.
  • Public documentation issue/PR created.

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

Signed-off-by: Dhrubo Saha <dhrubo@amazon.com>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 31, 2025

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 80.25%. Comparing base (a6eaf08) to head (d54fb9d).
Report is 3 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files
@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main    #3474      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     80.24%   80.25%   +0.01%     
- Complexity     6904     6906       +2     
============================================
  Files           610      610              
  Lines         30081    30077       -4     
  Branches       3370     3368       -2     
============================================
  Hits          24139    24139              
+ Misses         4491     4486       -5     
- Partials       1451     1452       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
ml-commons 80.25% <100.00%> (+0.01%) ⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@dhrubo-os dhrubo-os temporarily deployed to ml-commons-cicd-env January 31, 2025 07:18 — with GitHub Actions Inactive
Copy link
Collaborator

@Zhangxunmt Zhangxunmt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Are these change only applying to new client APIs? Can you double check any BWC issues due to this client change?

@@ -480,8 +480,7 @@ default ActionFuture<DeleteResponse> deleteAgent(String agentId) {
* @param listener a listener to be notified of the result
*/
default void deleteAgent(String agentId, ActionListener<DeleteResponse> listener) {
PlainActionFuture<DeleteResponse> actionFuture = PlainActionFuture.newFuture();
deleteAgent(agentId, null, actionFuture);
deleteAgent(agentId, null, listener);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

will it trigger BWC issue by using a listener?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

nope. Please check other apis.

@@ -361,7 +361,7 @@ default ActionFuture<MLUndeployModelsResponse> undeploy(String[] modelIds, @Null
* Undeploy model
* For additional info on deploy, refer: https://opensearch.org/docs/latest/ml-commons-plugin/api/model-apis/undeploy-model/
* @param modelIds the model ids
* @param modelIds the node ids. May be null for all nodes.
* @param nodeIds the node ids. May be null for all nodes.
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"May be null for all nodes" - this sounds not a description but a suggestion. Why not just put "Use null for all nodes" if you are fully sure.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I didn't change anything in the description. It was like that before. I just fixed nodeIds, before it was modelIds

@dhrubo-os
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Are these change only applying to new client APIs? Can you double check any BWC issues due to this client change?

We already tested it before with other apis like for model (which is mostly being used in other dependencies like skills/FF). If the client get the updated client from their maven snapshot, then it won't cause any issue, but before that it might cause some integ failure. But maven snapshot updates daily, so we should be fine here.

@dhrubo-os dhrubo-os merged commit 17b4d74 into opensearch-project:main Jan 31, 2025
14 checks passed
opensearch-trigger-bot bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 31, 2025
Signed-off-by: Dhrubo Saha <dhrubo@amazon.com>
(cherry picked from commit 17b4d74)
opensearch-trigger-bot bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 31, 2025
Signed-off-by: Dhrubo Saha <dhrubo@amazon.com>
(cherry picked from commit 17b4d74)
dhrubo-os added a commit that referenced this pull request Jan 31, 2025
…3480)

Signed-off-by: Dhrubo Saha <dhrubo@amazon.com>
(cherry picked from commit 17b4d74)

Co-authored-by: Dhrubo Saha <dhrubo@amazon.com>
dhrubo-os added a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 3, 2025
…3479)

Signed-off-by: Dhrubo Saha <dhrubo@amazon.com>
(cherry picked from commit 17b4d74)

Co-authored-by: Dhrubo Saha <dhrubo@amazon.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants