Skip to content

Conversation

@tcannon91
Copy link
Collaborator

@tcannon91 tcannon91 commented Feb 5, 2025

Proposed changes

Add the ability for users to create PrivateLink endpoints that can be used by atlas stream processors. The configuration for the PrivateLink endpoint will be managed in a .json file, which will be read into the configuration struct.

Jira ticket: CLOUDP-291620

Checklist

  • I have signed the MongoDB CLA
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have added any necessary documentation in document requirements section listed in CONTRIBUTING.md (if appropriate)
  • I have addressed the @mongodb/docs-cloud-team comments (if appropriate)
  • I have updated test/README.md (if an e2e test has been added)
  • I have run make fmt and formatted my code

Further comments

@tcannon91 tcannon91 force-pushed the CLOUDP-291620 branch 2 times, most recently from 19189fd to b450eae Compare February 5, 2025 21:58
@tcannon91 tcannon91 marked this pull request as ready for review February 6, 2025 14:55
@tcannon91 tcannon91 requested review from a team as code owners February 6, 2025 14:55
jasonrydberg
jasonrydberg previously approved these changes Feb 6, 2025
Copy link
Collaborator

@jasonrydberg jasonrydberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

carriecwk
carriecwk previously approved these changes Feb 10, 2025
Copy link

@carriecwk carriecwk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

jasonrydberg
jasonrydberg previously approved these changes Feb 10, 2025
Times(1)

require.NoError(t, createOpts.Run())
assert.Equal(t, "Atlas Stream Processing PrivateLink endpoint "+expectedInterfaceEndpointID+" created.\n", buf.String())
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

this can for sure be part of the test matrix

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 am running into issues bringing this up into the test matrix function because the mock store does not get called so the assertions (even though they are weak and I don't care about them) fail, but I need them to force a store return value that I can consistently assert against for this string where this comment is. Adding conditionals to my test matrix to have different branches within my test defeats the purpose of a test matrix in my opinion so I think leaving this as a separate test makes the most sense.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah if too hard no worries but was worth flagging that output check could be part of a matrix

gssbzn
gssbzn previously approved these changes Feb 11, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@gssbzn gssbzn left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Collaborator

@jasonrydberg jasonrydberg left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@tcannon91 tcannon91 merged commit 02ab1ce into mongodb:master Feb 11, 2025
21 of 22 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants