-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 202
chore(modelregistry): add PostgreSQL 16 image mapping #2812
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
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
chore(modelregistry): add PostgreSQL 16 image mapping #2812
Conversation
|
Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request. |
WalkthroughAdds a single image mapping entry to the model registry support: maps "IMAGES_POSTGRES" to "RELATED_IMAGE_POSTGRESQL_16_IMAGE" in Changes
Estimated code review effort🎯 1 (Trivial) | ⏱️ ~2 minutes
Poem
Pre-merge checks and finishing touches✅ Passed checks (3 passed)
✨ Finishing touches
🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)
📜 Recent review detailsConfiguration used: CodeRabbit UI Review profile: CHILL Plan: Pro 📒 Files selected for processing (1)
🚧 Files skipped from review as they are similar to previous changes (1)
⏰ Context from checks skipped due to timeout of 90000ms. You can increase the timeout in your CodeRabbit configuration to a maximum of 15 minutes (900000ms). (4)
Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out. Comment |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #2812 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 50.07% 50.07%
=======================================
Files 144 144
Lines 10469 10469
=======================================
Hits 5242 5242
Misses 4669 4669
Partials 558 558 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
internal/controller/components/modelregistry/modelregistry_support.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
internal/controller/components/modelregistry/modelregistry_support.go
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
f125ab8 to
942580d
Compare
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: riprasad, zdtsw The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Add IMAGES_POSTGRES to RELATED_IMAGE_RHEL9_POSTGRES16_IMAGE mapping in model registry image replacement configuration to support PostgreSQL 16 container image deployment. Related: opendatahub-io/model-registry-operator#374 Co-Authored-By: Claude <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Chris Hambridge <[email protected]>
942580d to
12797fb
Compare
|
New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed. |
|
/retest-required |
|
@chambridge: The following test failed, say
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
|
/retest-required |
Description
Add IMAGES_POSTGRES to RELATED_IMAGE_RHEL9_POSTGRES16_IMAGE mapping in model registry image replacement configuration to support PostgreSQL 16 container image deployment.
Related PRs:
How Has This Been Tested?
Screenshot or short clip
Merge criteria
E2E test suite update requirement
When bringing new changes to the operator code, such changes are by default required to be accompanied by extending and/or updating the E2E test suite accordingly.
To opt-out of this requirement:
E2E update requirement opt-out justificationsection belowE2E update requirement opt-out justification:
This PR adds a simple environment variable mapping (
IMAGES_POSTGRES)to the ModelRegistry component's
imagesMapwithout changing any functionalbehavior of the operator. The change:
E2E validation at the operator level
This is purely an infrastructure change to support downstream component
configuration and does not warrant E2E test coverage at the operator level.
Summary by CodeRabbit