feat(azure): adjust SKU and storage for yt01 and prod #1508
Conversation
This reverts commit 304f4da.
📝 Walkthrough📝 WalkthroughWalkthroughThe pull request introduces modifications across several Bicep files to enhance the configuration of PostgreSQL resources. Key changes include the addition of a new Changes
Possibly related PRs
Suggested reviewers
Warning Rate limit exceeded@arealmaas has exceeded the limit for the number of commits or files that can be reviewed per hour. Please wait 12 minutes and 9 seconds before requesting another review. ⌛ How to resolve this issue?After the wait time has elapsed, a review can be triggered using the We recommend that you space out your commits to avoid hitting the rate limit. 🚦 How do rate limits work?CodeRabbit enforces hourly rate limits for each developer per organization. Our paid plans have higher rate limits than the trial, open-source and free plans. In all cases, we re-allow further reviews after a brief timeout. Please see our FAQ for further information. 📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: .coderabbit.yaml 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? 🪧 TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (Invoked using PR comments)
Other keywords and placeholders
Documentation and Community
|
![coderabbitai[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/347564?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 2
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (6)
.azure/infrastructure/test.bicepparam (1)
39-39: Consider cost implications of enabled autoGrowWhile
autoGrow: 'Enabled'prevents out-of-storage scenarios, it could lead to unexpected costs in case of rapid data growth or test data accumulation. Consider:
- Setting up monitoring alerts for storage growth
- Implementing regular cleanup procedures for test data
- Documenting the maximum allowed growth limit
.azure/infrastructure/prod.bicepparam (1)
37-42: Review storage configuration for cost-effectivenessThe storage configuration is set to Premium tier with substantial initial allocation:
- 256GB storage size is significant
- 1100 IOPS is relatively high
- Premium tier with AutoGrow enabled will have cost implications
While these settings might be appropriate for production, consider:
- Is the initial 256GB storage size based on current data volume plus growth projections?
- Have you considered using a more conservative initial size with AutoGrow handling the scaling?
.azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep (3)
34-40: Consider adding runtime validation for storage tierWhile the comment indicates that the 'Premium' tier is not supported for burstable SKUs, there's no runtime validation to prevent this misconfiguration. Consider adding a validation decorator or runtime check.
Example validation:
@export() type StorageConfiguration = { storageSizeGB: int iops: int? autoGrow: 'Enabled' | 'Disabled' tier: (sku.tier == 'Burstable' ? null : 'Premium')? }
42-43: Enhance parameter documentationConsider adding more detailed documentation for the storage parameter, including:
- Valid ranges for storageSizeGB and iops
- Impact of autoGrow settings
- Tier compatibility with different SKUs
Line range hint
27-113: Architecture Review: Storage and SKU changes are well-structuredThe changes introduce flexible storage configuration while maintaining backward compatibility. The separation of concerns between SKU and storage configuration is clean and follows Azure best practices. The new structure allows for better control over PostgreSQL resources across different environments.
A few architectural considerations:
- The storage configuration could be extended to support future requirements like backup retention
- Consider adding a parameter for storage performance tier selection
- Think about adding monitoring and alerts for storage capacity and IOPS utilization
.azure/infrastructure/main.bicep (1)
62-62: Consider documenting storage configuration constraintsThe storage property is correctly added to the postgresConfiguration parameter. Consider adding parameter decorators to document any constraints on storage values (e.g., min/max IOPS, storage size limits).
Example decorator pattern:
@description('Storage configuration for PostgreSQL instance') @metadata({ storageSizeGB: { minimum: 32, maximum: 16384 }, iops: { minimum: 120 } })
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (6)
.azure/infrastructure/main.bicep(2 hunks).azure/infrastructure/prod.bicepparam(1 hunks).azure/infrastructure/staging.bicepparam(1 hunks).azure/infrastructure/test.bicepparam(1 hunks).azure/infrastructure/yt01.bicepparam(1 hunks).azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep(2 hunks)
🔇 Additional comments (8)
.azure/infrastructure/staging.bicepparam (1)
37-40: Storage configuration looks appropriate for staging, but consider monitoring.
The storage configuration with autoGrow enabled is a good practice to prevent storage-related issues. However, consider:
- Verify if 32GB is sufficient based on your current staging environment usage patterns
- Monitor storage growth and costs since autoGrow is enabled on a burstable tier (Standard_B1ms)
Let's check the current database size in the staging environment:
.azure/infrastructure/test.bicepparam (1)
37-40: Verify if 32GB storage size is sufficient for test environment
Please confirm that 32GB storage size aligns with the expected data growth and testing requirements. Consider:
- Current database size
- Expected growth rate
- Test data volume requirements
Run this script to check current database sizes across environments:
.azure/infrastructure/prod.bicepparam (1)
34-34: Verify the necessity of doubling compute capacity in production
The SKU upgrade from Standard_D4ads_v5 to Standard_D8ads_v5 represents a significant increase in compute capacity and cost. While this might be necessary for production workloads, it's important to validate this change.
Let's check if there's evidence of resource constraints that justify this upgrade:
✅ Verification successful
PostgreSQL SKU upgrade appears justified for production workload
The SKU upgrade to Standard_D8ads_v5 is consistent across both production and YT01 environments, with additional performance-focused configurations:
- Both environments use identical compute SKU and storage configurations
- YT01 has performance monitoring enabled (enableIndexTuning and enableQueryPerformanceInsight)
- The storage configuration is substantial (256GB, 1100 IOPS, Premium tier) indicating high-performance requirements
- Other production services (ServiceBus, Redis) are also configured for production-grade performance
The SKU upgrade appears to be part of a well-considered infrastructure configuration that aligns with production performance requirements. The identical configuration in YT01 suggests proper testing of the upgraded resources before production deployment.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Search for any performance-related discussions or metrics in the codebase
# that might justify the SKU upgrade
# Look for relevant discussions in recent commits
git log --grep="performance\|cpu\|memory\|Standard_D[48]ads" --since="3 months ago" --pretty=format:"%h - %s" 304f4da7eae3657dc85118bbedce393d1a12d5a8...HEAD
# Search for monitoring configurations that might indicate performance thresholds
rg -g "cpu|memory" --type yaml ".azure/monitoring"
Length of output: 199
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a broader search strategy to understand the context of this change
# Search for any files containing D4ads or D8ads SKU references
rg -i "Standard_D[48]ads"
# Look for any related configuration files
fd -e bicepparam -e bicep
# Search for performance-related issues or discussions in PR descriptions
gh pr list --state all --search "performance cpu memory" --json number,title,body --limit 10
# Look for monitoring or metrics configurations in any yaml files
fd -e yaml -e yml | xargs cat
Length of output: 79169
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's search for any performance metrics, monitoring, or resource utilization data
# that might justify the SKU upgrade
# Search for any performance-related configurations or metrics in bicep files
fd -e bicep -e bicepparam | xargs grep -l "performance\|memory\|cpu\|Standard_D[48]ads"
# Look for any documentation about infrastructure requirements
fd "README.md\|INFRASTRUCTURE.md" | xargs cat
# Search for any monitoring or metrics configurations
rg -g "monitoring\|metrics\|performance" --type yaml --type json
# Check for any previous SKU configurations
rg "Standard_D4ads_v5"
Length of output: 624
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's try a more focused search approach
# Look for any SKU changes in git history
git log -p --grep="SKU\|D[48]ads" -- .azure/infrastructure/
# Search for specific SKU mentions in infrastructure files
rg -l "Standard_D[48]ads" .azure/infrastructure/
# Check for any performance or resource monitoring configurations
rg "monitoring" .azure/infrastructure/
# Look for any related configuration files
fd -e bicepparam | xargs cat
Length of output: 196
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's examine the specific SKU configurations in both prod and yt01 environments
# Check the content of both files containing SKU configurations
echo "=== Production SKU Configuration ==="
cat .azure/infrastructure/prod.bicepparam
echo -e "\n=== YT01 SKU Configuration ==="
cat .azure/infrastructure/yt01.bicepparam
# Look for any recent commits modifying these files
echo -e "\n=== Recent changes to SKU configurations ==="
git log -p -n 5 -- .azure/infrastructure/prod.bicepparam .azure/infrastructure/yt01.bicepparam
Length of output: 3554
.azure/infrastructure/yt01.bicepparam (2)
37-42: Review Premium storage configuration
The new storage configuration introduces production-grade settings:
- Premium tier with 256GB storage
- 1100 IOPS
- AutoGrow enabled
These settings suggest high-performance requirements. Please verify:
- Are these storage parameters aligned with the actual workload requirements for the 'yt01' environment?
- Is the Premium tier necessary for this environment?
Consider documenting the rationale for these specific storage parameters in the infrastructure documentation to help with future capacity planning.
34-34: Verify the SKU upgrade impact
The change from Standard_D4ads_v5 to Standard_D8ads_v5 represents a significant increase in compute capacity. Since this PR is reverting a previous commit, please confirm:
- Is this intentional doubling of compute resources necessary?
- Have you assessed the cost implications?
.azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep (1)
27-27: LGTM: SKU addition aligns with requirements
The addition of 'Standard_D8ads_v5' SKU is valid and properly integrated into the existing type definition.
.azure/infrastructure/main.bicep (2)
220-220: Verify storage configuration across environments
The storage parameter is correctly passed to the PostgreSQL module. However, we should verify that the storage configuration values are appropriate for each environment.
✅ Verification successful
Storage configuration appears appropriate across environments
The storage configurations are well-defined and follow a logical pattern across environments:
-
Production and YT01 environments are configured with premium tier storage:
- 256GB storage size
- 1100 IOPS
- Premium tier
- Auto-grow enabled
-
Staging and Test environments have lighter configurations:
- 32GB storage size
- Auto-grow enabled
- Basic tier (implied by absence of tier specification)
The configuration follows best practices with higher resources in production and reduced resources in non-production environments, while maintaining auto-grow capability across all environments for safety.
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify storage configuration across environment parameter files
# Expected: Find storage configuration in parameter files for different environments
echo "Checking storage configuration in environment parameter files:"
rg -A 5 "storage:" .azure/infrastructure/*.bicepparam
Length of output: 1701
58-58: Verify the StorageConfiguration type import
The import statement is correctly added. However, let's verify the type definition in the PostgreSQL module.
✅ Verification successful
StorageConfiguration type is properly defined and imported
The StorageConfiguration type in the PostgreSQL module is well-structured with all necessary storage-related properties:
- Required
storageSizeGBas integer - Optional
iopsas integer autoGrowwith valid enum values- Optional
tierfor non-burstable SKUs
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify the StorageConfiguration type definition
# Expected: Find the type definition in the PostgreSQL module
rg "type StorageConfiguration" .azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep
Length of output: 101
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's see the complete type definition and its usage
rg -A 5 "type StorageConfiguration" .azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep
Length of output: 241
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Actionable comments posted: 1
🧹 Outside diff range and nitpick comments (1)
.azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep (1)
108-113: Consider monitoring implications of new configurationWith the upgraded SKU and storage settings:
- Ensure monitoring alerts are adjusted for the new performance baseline
- Consider adding storage usage metrics to existing diagnostics
The diagnostic settings (line 190) already capture metrics, but consider adding specific storage-related alert rules in a separate monitoring configuration.
📜 Review details
Configuration used: .coderabbit.yaml
Review profile: CHILL
📒 Files selected for processing (5)
.azure/infrastructure/prod.bicepparam(1 hunks).azure/infrastructure/staging.bicepparam(1 hunks).azure/infrastructure/test.bicepparam(1 hunks).azure/infrastructure/yt01.bicepparam(1 hunks).azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep(2 hunks)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (4)
- .azure/infrastructure/prod.bicepparam
- .azure/infrastructure/staging.bicepparam
- .azure/infrastructure/test.bicepparam
- .azure/infrastructure/yt01.bicepparam
🔇 Additional comments (3)
.azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep (3)
42-43: LGTM: Storage parameter is well-defined
The parameter declaration is correct and includes appropriate documentation.
27-27: LGTM: SKU addition aligns with requirements
The addition of 'Standard_D8ads_v5' to the SKU options is valid and aligns with the PR objectives to adjust SKU configurations.
108-113: LGTM: Storage configuration is properly implemented
The storage configuration is correctly mapped to the PostgreSQL Flexible Server resource properties.
✅ Verification successful
Storage configuration implementation is correctly validated
The storage configuration implementation is verified to be correct based on the following:
- The
StorageConfigurationtype is properly defined with all required properties and their valid values - The storage object in the PostgreSQL resource correctly maps all properties from the input parameter
- The implementation matches Azure's PostgreSQL Flexible Server storage requirements
- All property types are properly constrained (e.g., tier values are explicitly enumerated)
🏁 Scripts executed
The following scripts were executed for the analysis:
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Description: Verify storage configurations across environments
# Look for storage configurations in parameter files to ensure consistency
rg -A 10 'storage:' '.azure/infrastructure/*.bicepparam'
Length of output: 131
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Let's first find all bicepparam files in the repository
fd -e bicepparam
# Then search for storage configurations in all Bicep files
rg -A 10 'storage:' --type bicep
Length of output: 81
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# Search for storage configurations in all files with .bicep extension
rg -A 10 'storage:' -g '*.bicep'
# Also look for parameter files that might define storage configurations
rg -A 10 'storage:' -g '*.parameters.json'
Length of output: 373
Script:
#!/bin/bash
# First, let's find all Bicep files in the repository
fd .bicep
# Then let's look at the module file content to understand the storage parameter definition
cat .azure/modules/postgreSql/create.bicep
Length of output: 7663
|
🤖 I have created a release *beep* *boop* --- ## [1.39.0](v1.38.0...v1.39.0) (2024-11-22) ### Features * **azure:** adjust SKU and storage for yt01 and prod ([b7e4909](b7e4909)) * **azure:** adjust SKU and storage for yt01 and prod ([#1508](#1508)) ([5478275](5478275)) * **graphql:** Create separate type for sub-parties ([#1510](#1510)) ([9c75f11](9c75f11)) ### Bug Fixes * **azure:** ensure correct properties are used when adjusting SKU and storage for postgres ([#1514](#1514)) ([c51d2f5](c51d2f5)) * Reenable party list cache, log party name look failure with negative cache TTL ([#1395](#1395)) ([d18bb76](d18bb76)) --- This PR was generated with [Release Please](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please). See [documentation](https://github.com/googleapis/release-please#release-please).
This reverts commit 304f4da.
Description
Related Issue(s)
Verification
Documentation
docs-directory, Altinnpedia or a separate linked PR in altinn-studio-docs., if applicable)Summary by CodeRabbit
Summary by CodeRabbit