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 CR property to disable Cryostat built-in discovery mechanisms #452

Closed
andrewazores opened this issue Sep 13, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #474
Closed

Add CR property to disable Cryostat built-in discovery mechanisms #452

andrewazores opened this issue Sep 13, 2022 · 3 comments · Fixed by #474
Assignees
Labels

Comments

@andrewazores
Copy link
Member

The environment variable CRYOSTAT_DISABLE_BUILTIN_DISCOVERY can be set to true on the Cryostat container to disable the built-in discovery mechanisms. In an Operator context this would mean disabling Cryostat's Endpoints querying/watch. This would be used in cases where the end user only intends to have applications discovered via the Discovery Plugin API.

@andrewazores andrewazores added feat New feature or request good first issue Good for newcomers high-priority labels Sep 13, 2022
@tthvo tthvo self-assigned this Sep 22, 2022
@tthvo
Copy link
Member

tthvo commented Oct 12, 2022

@andrewazores I just noticed that Cryostat check the presence/non-blankness of the variable to determine whether to disable built-in discovery.

https://github.com/cryostatio/cryostat/blob/bc9eb4d2319eb8e2b340eca6090fdc41c176e162/src/main/java/io/cryostat/discovery/BuiltInDiscovery.java#L82

Should this condition also includes a check for its value? If not, the operator can just not mount the environment in if disabled option is chosen.

@andrewazores
Copy link
Member Author

It could be a check for the value, sure. But I think in a few different places Cryostat just does what you see there and checks whether the variable is defined/non-empty, rather than checking for a specific "true" string.

Is how it works now easy enough to deal with on the Operator side?

@tthvo
Copy link
Member

tthvo commented Oct 12, 2022

Right, it would not be a problem :D Operator could check and not mount the environment easy enough.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
No open projects
Status: Done
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants