Rabbitmq vhost and user support by lmiccini · Pull Request #824 · openstack-k8s-operators/telemetry-operator

lmiccini · 2025-12-22T17:01:00Z

Add support for a dedicated rabbitmq cluster for notifications.

Add new messagingBus and notificationsBus interfaces to hold cluster, user and vhost names for optional usage.
The controller adds these values to the TransportURL create request when present.

Additionally, we migrate RabbitMQ cluster name to RabbitMq config struct using DefaultRabbitMqConfig from infra-operator to automatically populate the new Cluster field from legacy RabbitMqClusterName.

Example usage:

spec:
messagingBus:
cluster: rpc-rabbitmq
user: rpc-user
vhost: rpc-vhost
notificationsBus:
cluster: notifications-rabbitmq
user: notifications-user
vhost: notifications-vhost

Jira: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSPRH-23909

Depends-on: openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator#1797

lmiccini · 2025-12-23T05:42:18Z

/test telemetry-operator-build-deploy-kuttl

lmiccini · 2025-12-24T09:13:13Z

/test telemetry-operator-build-deploy-kuttl

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-19T10:46:42Z

Merge Failed.

This change or one of its cross-repo dependencies was unable to be automatically merged with the current state of its repository. Please rebase the change and upload a new patchset.
Warning:
Error merging github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/telemetry-operator for 824,c508071f7c67e908b4c50fd753be35af6e2baea6

jlarriba · 2026-01-20T15:36:30Z

+	if spec.RabbitMqClusterName == "" {
+		spec.RabbitMqClusterName = "rabbitmq"
+	}
+	rabbitmqv1.DefaultRabbitMqConfig(&spec.MessagingBus, spec.RabbitMqClusterName)


Would Ceilometer would need to listen to the Notification rabbitmq? Ceilometer is the consumer of the notifications produced by other services (or itself). If Ceilometer is not subscribed to notifications, no one will consume that, IMHO.

jlarriba · 2026-01-20T15:39:09Z

Why do we have to have both Notification and Messages RabbitMQs configuration in every service when our services only ever use one RabbitMQ?

vyzigold

I have a question. I see in the config templates, we have a if / else construct, meaning each service can use only one of the busses at the time. Wouldn't it make sense to have something similar in the controller code? To call transportURLCreateOrUpdate conditionally only for one of the busses, so that there aren't unneeded transporturl CRs.

Another thing we'll need to consider and maybe document related to what Juan noted. If each service can now choose from 2 busses and ceilometer will receive notifications only on one of the bus as well, there won't be any notification metrics available from services using the other bus.

jlarriba · 2026-01-21T07:53:26Z

Actually, I did a deep dive on Ceilometer, Aodh and CloudKitty code regarding messaging and I have found that both Ceilometer and Aodh only use Notifications, they never send or receive any kind of rpc messages. As highlighted previously, Ceilometer is the only consumer of Notifications in that bus, so it is critical that it is connected to that specific RabbitMQ instance.

Aodh only makes use of Notification bus also, while CloudKitty uses the tcp Messaging Bus and never sends Notifications.

lmiccini · 2026-01-22T05:47:59Z

Why do we have to have both Notification and Messages RabbitMQs configuration in every service when our services only ever use one RabbitMQ?

Hey Juan, thanks for having a look. I took at stab at trying to standardize every operator to use the same two interfaces - messagingBus and notificationsBus - for rpc and notifications. Using one or the other (or both) depends on how each service works.
Will review all the other comments and try to address them, please bear with me.

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-26T12:43:44Z

This change depends on a change that failed to merge.

Change openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator#1779 is needed.

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-26T12:53:07Z

This change depends on a change that failed to merge.

Change openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator#1779 is needed.

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-01-31T08:33:43Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/3ca9f8046bc04f348344d708fb8473f1

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 15m 07s
⚠️ telemetry-operator-multinode-cloudkitty SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job telemetry-openstack-meta-content-provider-master
❌ telemetry-openstack-meta-content-provider-master FAILURE in 18m 01s
⚠️ telemetry-operator-multinode-default-telemetry SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ functional-tests-osp18 SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job telemetry-openstack-meta-content-provider-master

lmiccini · 2026-01-31T11:49:59Z

recheck

lmiccini · 2026-01-31T11:50:14Z

/test telemetry-operator-build-deploy-kuttl

lmiccini · 2026-01-31T11:50:31Z

/test telemetry-operator-build-deploy

jlarriba · 2026-02-02T12:20:59Z

It looks very good now, I made a comment for a field that has been forgotten. Otherwise it lgtm.

The precommit-check complains about adding a new mandatory field: this would break backwards compatibility so it needs to be optional. The other linting errors should be very easy to fix.

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-02-02T13:43:38Z

Build failed (check pipeline). Post recheck (without leading slash)
to rerun all jobs. Make sure the failure cause has been resolved before
you rerun jobs.

https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/rdoproject.org/buildset/42e6964c396748af9baea5b0f6285ef5

❌ openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider FAILURE in 12m 05s
⚠️ telemetry-operator-multinode-cloudkitty SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job telemetry-openstack-meta-content-provider-master
❌ telemetry-openstack-meta-content-provider-master FAILURE in 12m 07s
⚠️ telemetry-operator-multinode-default-telemetry SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job openstack-k8s-operators-content-provider
⚠️ functional-tests-osp18 SKIPPED Skipped due to failed job telemetry-openstack-meta-content-provider-master

lmiccini · 2026-02-02T14:02:46Z

It looks very good now, I made a comment for a field that has been forgotten. Otherwise it lgtm.

The precommit-check complains about adding a new mandatory field: this would break backwards compatibility so it needs to be optional. The other linting errors should be very easy to fix.

Thanks, I should have addressed both the lint and leftover field. I think we should override the crd check (not just for telemetry but for most of the operators), or at least this is our current plan.

lmiccini · 2026-02-02T14:06:12Z

recheck

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-02-02T16:22:55Z

This change depends on a change that failed to merge.

Change openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator#1779 is needed.

lmiccini · 2026-02-02T17:18:51Z

recheck

Add support for a dedicated rabbitmq cluster for notifications. Add new messagingBus and notificationsBus interfaces to hold cluster, user and vhost names for optional usage. The controller adds these values to the TransportURL create request when present. Additionally, we migrate RabbitMQ cluster name to RabbitMq config struct using DefaultRabbitMqConfig from infra-operator to automatically populate the new Cluster field from legacy RabbitMqClusterName. Example usage: spec: messagingBus: cluster: rpc-rabbitmq user: rpc-user vhost: rpc-vhost notificationsBus: cluster: notifications-rabbitmq user: notifications-user vhost: notifications-vhost Jira: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSPRH-23909

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-02-05T18:05:17Z

Merge Failed.

This change or one of its cross-repo dependencies was unable to be automatically merged with the current state of its repository. Please rebase the change and upload a new patchset.
Warning:
Error merging github.com/openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator for 1779,d0bba951fd942312b6e33713b2c686fed2fe5bf6

lmiccini · 2026-02-05T18:05:28Z

recheck

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2026-02-05T18:11:50Z

This change depends on a change that failed to merge.

Change openstack-k8s-operators/openstack-operator#1797 is needed.

lmiccini · 2026-02-05T18:12:40Z

recheck

openshift-ci · 2026-02-06T18:12:52Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

Approval requirements bypassed by manually added approval.

This pull-request has been approved by: lmiccini

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

stuggi · 2026-02-06T18:12:53Z

/override ci/prow/precommit-check

openshift-ci · 2026-02-06T18:12:59Z

@stuggi: Overrode contexts on behalf of stuggi: ci/prow/precommit-check

Details

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/precommit-check

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.

openshift-ci Bot requested review from dprince and elfiesmelfie December 22, 2025 17:01

lmiccini added the do-not-merge/hold label Dec 22, 2025

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch 3 times, most recently from f3d8a14 to b7891d7 Compare December 24, 2025 07:31

openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase label Jan 9, 2026

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch from b7891d7 to c508071 Compare January 19, 2026 10:46

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch from c508071 to ea915a4 Compare January 19, 2026 11:25

openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase label Jan 19, 2026

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch 2 times, most recently from 5c776f5 to adbdc4b Compare January 20, 2026 12:43

jlarriba reviewed Jan 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

vyzigold reviewed Jan 20, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread internal/autoscaling/const.go Outdated

Comment thread internal/ceilometer/const.go Outdated

Comment thread internal/cloudkitty/const.go Outdated

Comment thread api/v1beta1/autoscaling_webhook.go Outdated

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch 3 times, most recently from cd36d6f to fe7d760 Compare January 21, 2026 12:35

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch 4 times, most recently from 9012c1a to 94d477f Compare January 26, 2026 11:04

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch from 94d477f to 8bd837c Compare January 26, 2026 12:47

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch from 855f3cf to ce08c2f Compare January 31, 2026 06:23

jlarriba reviewed Feb 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

Comment thread api/v1beta1/cloudkitty_types.go Outdated

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch from ce08c2f to 8d290e5 Compare February 2, 2026 13:30

lmiccini added 5 commits February 5, 2026 18:51

Model transporturl and config files according to services usage

9faac21

Address feedback and fix ptr

9ad9942

Make deprecated parameter optional

11f9bbd

return warnings

873d6fa

lmiccini force-pushed the rabbitmq_vhosts branch from 8d290e5 to 873d6fa Compare February 5, 2026 18:05

lmiccini removed the do-not-merge/hold label Feb 5, 2026

stuggi added approved lgtm labels Feb 6, 2026

openshift-merge-bot Bot merged commit fe8dc27 into openstack-k8s-operators:main Feb 6, 2026
6 checks passed

Conversation

lmiccini commented Dec 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Dec 23, 2025

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Dec 24, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul Bot commented Jan 19, 2026

Uh oh!

jlarriba Jan 20, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jlarriba commented Jan 20, 2026

Uh oh!

vyzigold left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jlarriba commented Jan 21, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Jan 22, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul Bot commented Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul Bot commented Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul Bot commented Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Jan 31, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jlarriba commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul Bot commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul Bot commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Feb 2, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul Bot commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

lmiccini commented Feb 5, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci Bot commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

stuggi commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

openshift-ci Bot commented Feb 6, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

lmiccini commented Dec 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

lmiccini commented Jan 22, 2026 •

edited

Loading