feat: add webhook for manually approving traffic weight increase#849
Conversation
|
Hey @stefanprodan! Could you take a look at this? |
|
@mayankshah1607 can you please change the hook name to |
a1e84a7 to
5cea350
Compare
… increase Signed-off-by: Mayank Shah <mayankshah1614@gmail.com>
5cea350 to
873141b
Compare
stefanprodan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you please add the hook type to docs: https://github.com/fluxcd/flagger/blob/main/docs/gitbook/usage/webhooks.md
Signed-off-by: Mayank Shah <mayankshah1614@gmail.com>
7ce2c8e to
164bbb8
Compare
|
Thanks @stefanprodan , I have made the required changes. |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #849 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 56.81% 56.72% -0.09%
==========================================
Files 67 67
Lines 5418 5430 +12
==========================================
+ Hits 3078 3080 +2
- Misses 1881 1890 +9
- Partials 459 460 +1
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
stefanprodan
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM
Thanks @mayankshah1607
|
@stefanprodan Anything else to be done to get this one merged? |
|
@mayankshah1607 all is Ok, I'll merge it before the next release. |
|
@mayankshah1607 could you add Grofers to the user list here https://github.com/fluxcd/flagger#who-is-using-flagger? |
What is this change?
This PR adds a new webhook for manually approving traffic weight increase. The logic is similar to
confirm-promotion, but for approving traffic weight increase.Why is this needed?
Organizations have use-cases where they would like to wait indefinitely before the traffic weight on the canary increases. For example, we may want to hold at 10% weight, run some checks, smoke/conformance tests or manually verify metrics to ensure that the canary is reliable. This is especially useful in orgs which are in the process of making metrics and SLOs mature.
(Similar to how argo rollouts works)
Although we could use the
rolloutwebhook for this, it wouldn't wait indefinitely and eventually fail as a non-200 response from the webhook would count as an error.Example
Signed-off-by: Mayank Shah mayankshah1614@gmail.com