Skip to content

Add the route ID to uuid #3372

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

Merged
merged 7 commits into from
Sep 29, 2023
Merged
Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
23 changes: 23 additions & 0 deletions dispatch/route.go
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -180,6 +180,29 @@ func (r *Route) Key() string {
return b.String()
}

// ID returns a unique identifier for the route.
func (r *Route) ID() string {
b := strings.Builder{}

position := -1
if r.parent != nil {
// Find the position in the same level leaf.
for i, cr := range r.parent.Routes {
if cr == r {
position = i
break
}
}
}
b.WriteString(r.Key())

if position > -1 {
b.WriteRune('/')
b.WriteString(fmt.Sprint(position))
}
return b.String()
}

// Walk traverses the route tree in depth-first order.
func (r *Route) Walk(visit func(*Route)) {
visit(r)
Expand Down
68 changes: 68 additions & 0 deletions dispatch/route_test.go
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -853,3 +853,71 @@ routes:
}
}
}

func TestRouteID(t *testing.T) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

if we're only testing the top-level routes, there's no need for having sub-routes?
also it might be good to have routes with same key but different ids?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"I'm missing the context about this change. Is it linked to the pagination API?"

-> It is related as we need to UUID an aggregation group, aggregation group can be uuid by group_labels + routeId

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

=> if we're only testing the top-level routes, there's no need for having sub-routes?
also it might be good to have routes with same key but different ids?

Added the test

in := `
receiver: 'notify-def'

routes:
- matchers: ['{owner="team-A"}', '{level!="critical"}']
receiver: 'notify-D'
group_by: [...]
continue: true
- matchers: ['{owner="team-A"}', '{level!="critical"}']
receiver: 'notify-A'
routes:
- matchers: ['{env="testing"}', '{baz!~".*quux"}']
receiver: 'notify-testing'
group_by: [...]
- match:
env: "production"
receiver: 'notify-productionA'
group_wait: 1m
continue: true
- matchers: [ env=~"produ.*", job=~".*"]
receiver: 'notify-productionB'
group_wait: 30s
group_interval: 5m
repeat_interval: 1h
group_by: ['job']
- match_re:
owner: 'team-(B|C)'
group_by: ['foo', 'bar']
group_wait: 2m
receiver: 'notify-BC'
- matchers: [group_by="role"]
group_by: ['role']
routes:
- matchers: ['{env="testing"}']
receiver: 'notify-testing'
routes:
- matchers: [wait="long"]
group_wait: 2m
`

var ctree config.Route
if err := yaml.UnmarshalStrict([]byte(in), &ctree); err != nil {
t.Fatal(err)
}
tree := NewRoute(&ctree, nil)

expected := []string{
"{}",
"{}/{level!=\"critical\",owner=\"team-A\"}/0",
"{}/{level!=\"critical\",owner=\"team-A\"}/1",
"{}/{level!=\"critical\",owner=\"team-A\"}/{baz!~\".*quux\",env=\"testing\"}/0",
"{}/{level!=\"critical\",owner=\"team-A\"}/{env=\"production\"}/1",
"{}/{level!=\"critical\",owner=\"team-A\"}/{env=~\"produ.*\",job=~\".*\"}/2",
"{}/{owner=~\"^(?:team-(B|C))$\"}/2",
"{}/{group_by=\"role\"}/3",
"{}/{group_by=\"role\"}/{env=\"testing\"}/0",
"{}/{group_by=\"role\"}/{env=\"testing\"}/{wait=\"long\"}/0",
}

var got []string
tree.Walk(func(r *Route) {
got = append(got, r.ID())
})

require.ElementsMatch(t, got, expected)
}