Skip to content

Ignore user config provider aliases with conflict #11486

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

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

MichaelMorrisEst
Copy link
Contributor

Type of change

  • Bugfix

Description

Closes #11349. Handles the scenario where the user specifies config providers than conflict with the Strimzi defined config providers. When the situation arises, a warning is generated and the conflicting user config providers are ignored (as agreed at community call 29th May)

Checklist

Please go through this checklist and make sure all applicable tasks have been done

  • Write tests
  • Make sure all tests pass
  • Update documentation
  • Check RBAC rights for Kubernetes / OpenShift roles
  • Try your changes from Pod inside your Kubernetes and OpenShift cluster, not just locally
  • Reference relevant issue(s) and close them after merging
  • Update CHANGELOG.md
  • Supply screenshots for visual changes, such as Grafana dashboards

Signed-off-by: MichaelMorris <michael.morris@est.tech>
@ppatierno ppatierno requested review from fvaleri and a team May 30, 2025 07:37
Copy link
Contributor

@fvaleri fvaleri left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Hi @MichaelMorrisEst, sorry for the late review, and thanks for working on this. I left one comment for you to consider.

Comment on lines 828 to 829
LOGGER.warnCr(reconciliation, "config.provider " + alias + " ignored as it is not permitted. Not permitted aliases: " + strimziAliases);
userConfig.removeConfigOption("config.providers." + alias + ".class");
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

A simple warning log can be easily missed. Also, the operator should never change the user-provided configuration, even if it's wrong or conflicting.

As suggested in the bug report, we can raise an InvalidConfigurationException, and let the reconciliation fail. With that, the error would be logged and surfaced in the Kafka resource status. Wdyt?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Not sure if it is that simple, as we need to keep backwards compatibility in mind as well.

So what do we do today? IIRC, we just overwrite it? In which case warning while overwritting it is likely much better than failing the whole reconciliation.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We don't overwrite. We keep both configurations and the user-provided one wins because it is applied last. Obviously, this make the operator fails if it is not compatible with what it expects (see the issue report). For this reason, I don't think there is a backwards compatibility issue raising an config exception. Of course, we can leave a release note about this change.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ok, I thought we just overwrote it. But if it is as you say, throwing the exception is good. Thanks for the clarification! 👍

@fvaleri fvaleri added this to the 0.47.0 milestone Jun 9, 2025
Signed-off-by: MichaelMorris <michael.morris@est.tech>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[Bug]: Config provider alias conflict in Kafka config
3 participants