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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Custom namespaces should not be included in the prometheus alerts #9005

Closed
travisn opened this issue Oct 19, 2021 · 6 comments
Closed

Custom namespaces should not be included in the prometheus alerts #9005

travisn opened this issue Oct 19, 2021 · 6 comments
Assignees
@travisn
Labels
bug monitoring
Projects
v1.9

Comments

@travisn
Copy link
Member

travisn commented Oct 19, 2021

Is this a bug report or feature request?

  • Bug Report

Deviation from expected behavior:
With #8985 a custom namespace openshift-storage was included in the prometheus alert rules. The upstream prometheus rules should not include such custom namespaces.

Expected behavior:
We need to find a way to parameterize the namespace. But if a default namespace is specified upstream, it should be rook-ceph.

How to reproduce it (minimal and precise):

Search the prometheus rules for openshift-storage.
@travisn travisn added this to To do in v1.7 via automation Oct 19, 2021
@travisn travisn mentioned this issue Oct 19, 2021
Merged
10 tasks
@travisn travisn mentioned this issue Nov 2, 2021
Closed
@travisn travisn mentioned this issue Nov 15, 2021
Closed
@github-actions
Copy link

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in a week if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions
Copy link

This issue has been automatically closed due to inactivity. Please re-open if this still requires investigation.

v1.7 automation moved this from To do to Done Dec 25, 2021
@parth-gr parth-gr reopened this Dec 28, 2021
v1.7 automation moved this from Done to In progress Dec 28, 2021
@yuvalman yuvalman mentioned this issue Dec 30, 2021
Closed
10 tasks
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jan 4, 2022

This issue has been automatically closed due to inactivity. Please re-open if this still requires investigation.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this as completed Jan 4, 2022
v1.7 automation moved this from In progress to Done Jan 4, 2022
@travisn
Copy link
Member Author

travisn commented Jan 4, 2022

This would be resolved by #9503, which is in progress

@travisn travisn reopened this Jan 4, 2022
v1.7 automation moved this from Done to In progress Jan 4, 2022
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the wontfix label Jan 5, 2022
@travisn travisn removed this from In progress in v1.7 Jan 11, 2022
@travisn travisn added this to To do in v1.8 via automation Jan 11, 2022
@travisn travisn moved this from To do to In progress in v1.8 Jan 20, 2022
@travisn travisn removed this from In progress in v1.8 Feb 22, 2022
@travisn travisn added this to To do in v1.9 via automation Feb 22, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Mar 6, 2022

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in a week if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@travisn travisn removed the wontfix label Mar 7, 2022
@travisn travisn mentioned this issue Mar 7, 2022
Merged
7 tasks
@travisn travisn moved this from To do to In progress in v1.9 Mar 7, 2022
@travisn travisn assigned travisn and unassigned aruniiird Mar 7, 2022
@travisn
Copy link
Member Author

travisn commented Mar 21, 2022

Fixed by updating the latest rules in #9837, to be included in v1.9.

@travisn travisn closed this as completed Mar 21, 2022
@leseb leseb moved this from In progress to Done in v1.9 Mar 23, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees

@travisn travisn

Labels
bug monitoring
Projects
No open projects
v1.9
Done
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
3 participants
@aruniiird @travisn @parth-gr