-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8.3k
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
[Synthetics] Make core API key include read_ilm
privilege in Stateful only
#178897
Merged
justinkambic
merged 9 commits into
elastic:main
from
justinkambic:332/only-request-ilm-api-key-perms-for-non-serverless-builds
Mar 22, 2024
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
9 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
7f62ddf
Make `read_ilm` privilege request depend on Kibana build flavor not b…
justinkambic aae3693
Reduce sugar consumption.
justinkambic 98581b5
Tighten type definition.
justinkambic 2b9ee96
Fix API test references to updated field.
justinkambic 49acc2d
Fix API tests.
justinkambic ae958df
Opt to utilize Elasticsearch capabilities API instead of Kibana build…
justinkambic 36cdd2f
Last-minute cleanup.
justinkambic b5577d2
Remove redundant logger call.
justinkambic 30ddac0
DRY the code off.
justinkambic File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we implement equivalent serverless api integration tests where we pass true?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes I'm in the process of planning this with the Synthetics-on-Serverless team. I will likely do this in a separate PR that focuses just on implementing this. There will likely be other stuff that needs to change and it won't be a simple lift-and-shift. This will explode the delta for this change to many times its current size and require review burden from some additional folks who aren't on this PR already. Synthetics still isn't live in Prod, so nothing we do will impact existing early adopters, and we will likely include the API tests as acceptance criteria for switching on the plugin.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Synthetics is designed to work with our managed SaaS testing locations by default. Locally, if you haven't run an instance of this service alongside your Kibana and configured them to talk to each other (requires Minikube and some extra setup), you'll be prompted to create your own "private" location, which involves enrolling an agent in Fleet and creating some config.
To see this work locally end-to-end you'd need to also set up Fleet. The way we've done this in the past is via the
elastic-package
'sstack up
command. It's not super fun to get that working locally, however. The best way to test things end-to-end would be to deploy this PR to cloud QA. LMK if you'd like me to spin one up so you can see it working. This way you'd avoid having to set these things up manually on your local system.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I do apologize, the testing steps require some knowledge of running Synthetics locally. I'll spin up a cloud instance of this patch so we can see it work in cloud.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks, Justin! I don't think it's necessary to spin up a serverless instance - I trust the other reviewers have given this a thorough testing, I just wanted to understand why I wasn't seeing what I thought I should - I don't have any experience with synthetics. This makes sense to me now. I appreciate the time you took to explain.
And thank you for the follow up re:tests. Is there an open issue for this work already?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not yet, I will make the ticket before I merge this though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Issue is linked. I will probably merge later today, or tomorrow morning.