Skip to content

COO-1515: cluster/component healh backend & resources update#976

Merged
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 1 commit intorhobs:mainfrom
tremes:uiplugin-extend
Feb 5, 2026
Merged

COO-1515: cluster/component healh backend & resources update#976
openshift-merge-bot[bot] merged 1 commit intorhobs:mainfrom
tremes:uiplugin-extend

Conversation

@tremes
Copy link
Contributor

@tremes tremes commented Jan 19, 2026

This enables new feature "component health" evaluation in the cluster-health-analyzer. The feature is tracked in OBSDA-1293. The main additions here are:

  • configmap with the components tree definition - definition used for the actual health evaluation
  • clusterrole & RBAC updates - to be able to read cluster resources
  • health-analyzer deployment adjustments

@tremes
Copy link
Contributor Author

tremes commented Jan 19, 2026

@jgbernalp please take a look 🙏

@tremes tremes changed the title feat: cluster/component healh backend & resources update COO-1515: cluster/component healh backend & resources update Jan 19, 2026
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

openshift-ci-robot commented Jan 19, 2026

@tremes: This pull request references COO-1515 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the task to target the "4.22.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

This enables new feature "component health" evaluation in the cluster-health-analyzer. The feature is tracked in OBSDA-1293. The main additions here are:

  • configmap with the components tree definition - definition used for the actual health evaluation
  • clusterrole & RBAC updates - to be able to read cluster resources
  • health-analyzer deployment adjustments

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@jgbernalp
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@simonpasquier simonpasquier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

My initial understanding was that the incidents and clusterHealthAnalyzer were equivalent hence I'm not sure to get why we deploy additional resources when clusterHealthAnalyzer is enabled.

@simonpasquier
Copy link
Contributor

Not directly to this PR but it looks like we don't have any end-to-end tests for the health analyzer (even something as simple as adding the plugin with the feature being enabled and testing that the resource is successfully reconciled)?

@tremes
Copy link
Contributor Author

tremes commented Jan 28, 2026

My initial understanding was that the incidents and clusterHealthAnalyzer were equivalent hence I'm not sure to get why we deploy additional resources when clusterHealthAnalyzer is enabled.

@simonpasquier They were the same, but we want to enable this new feature (cluster/component health) in the cluster-health-analyzer and therefore these updates.

Not directly to this PR but it looks like we don't have any end-to-end tests for the health analyzer (even something as simple as adding the plugin with the feature being enabled and testing that the resource is successfully reconciled)?

👍 I will create a task for this.

@simonpasquier
Copy link
Contributor

My initial understanding was that the incidents and clusterHealthAnalyzer were equivalent hence I'm not sure to get why we deploy additional resources when clusterHealthAnalyzer is enabled.

@simonpasquier They were the same, but we want to enable this new feature (cluster/component health) in the cluster-health-analyzer and therefore these updates.

I suppose that it's more about me not understanding the scope of the work. Let's chat tomorrow morning.

Copy link
Contributor

@simonpasquier simonpasquier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

/lgtm

@simonpasquier
Copy link
Contributor

/approve

@openshift-ci
Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 5, 2026

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: simonpasquier, tremes

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:

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

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved label Feb 5, 2026
@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit 5321e5e into rhobs:main Feb 5, 2026
11 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants

Comments