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

Add check for mappings view API call during create detector #862

Conversation

amsiglan
Copy link
Collaborator

Description

Currently the field mapping configuration component does a blanket check on changes made to the detector and tries to fetch the updated mappings for any change made to the detector.
This PR ensures we only check for relevant changes like the data source, log type or detection rules.

Issues Resolved

#861

Check List

  • Commits are signed per the DCO using --signoff

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.

Copy link

codecov bot commented Jan 31, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (7837a99) 31.03% compared to head (6c4c82e) 31.02%.

Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #862      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   31.03%   31.02%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         151      151              
  Lines        5111     5116       +5     
  Branches      948      897      -51     
==========================================
+ Hits         1586     1587       +1     
- Misses       3335     3339       +4     
  Partials      190      190              

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

@amsiglan amsiglan merged commit 0b9016d into opensearch-project:main Feb 6, 2024
9 of 11 checks passed
opensearch-trigger-bot bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2024
…detector (#862)

Signed-off-by: Amardeepsingh Siglani <[email protected]>
(cherry picked from commit 0b9016d)
Signed-off-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
amsiglan pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Feb 6, 2024
…detector (#862) (#868)

(cherry picked from commit 0b9016d)

Signed-off-by: Amardeepsingh Siglani <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: github-actions[bot] <github-actions[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>
@amsiglan amsiglan added the backport 2.11 PRs to be backported to 2.11 branch label Apr 10, 2024
@opensearch-trigger-bot
Copy link
Contributor

The backport to 2.11 failed:

The process '/usr/bin/git' failed with exit code 128

To backport manually, run these commands in your terminal:

# Navigate to the root of your repository
cd $(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
# Fetch latest updates from GitHub
git fetch
# Create a new working tree
git worktree add ../.worktrees/security-analytics-dashboards-plugin/backport-2.11 2.11
# Navigate to the new working tree
pushd ../.worktrees/security-analytics-dashboards-plugin/backport-2.11
# Create a new branch
git switch --create backport-862-to-2.11
# Cherry-pick the merged commit of this pull request and resolve the conflicts
git cherry-pick -x --mainline 1 0b9016d8efc47e75cb9fe3291d0974cfe0c864eb
# Push it to GitHub
git push --set-upstream origin backport-862-to-2.11
# Go back to the original working tree
popd
# Delete the working tree
git worktree remove ../.worktrees/security-analytics-dashboards-plugin/backport-2.11

Then, create a pull request where the base branch is 2.11 and the compare/head branch is backport-862-to-2.11.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
backport 2.x backport 2.11 PRs to be backported to 2.11 branch failed backport
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants