Skip to content
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

Update the region and node sizes to allow for metadata #2395

Open
1 of 2 tasks
mrsimonemms opened this issue Jan 23, 2025 · 1 comment
Open
1 of 2 tasks

Update the region and node sizes to allow for metadata #2395

mrsimonemms opened this issue Jan 23, 2025 · 1 comment
Labels
feature Something new

Comments

@mrsimonemms
Copy link
Contributor

What is your feature idea?

Currently, the API call for region and node sizes are just string[]. We should change this to an array of objects, to allow for some metadata.

Image

As a starting point, I'd suggest an interface like this:

interface I {
  id: string; // the ID that is sent back to use this option. This would be the same as the string currently used
  name: string | void; // the name the cloud provider gives - eg, `eu-west2` could be `London`. Default to code if not provided
  disabled: bool; // if true, this means that the option would not be displayed
  available: bool; // if false, there is a temporary outage preventing deployment
  message: string | void; // any message explaining the outage
  group: string | void; // allow for logical grouping in `<optiongroup>`. No grouping if `undefined`
}

In my suggestion, the interfaces for region and node sizes would be identical because we want to communicate the same things.

Why is it needed?

These could be used for detecting and communicating cloud provider problems and giving a richer user experience. It would also direct users to the actual problem rather than assuming that the Kubefirst platform has a problem.

I've just experienced a cloud outage. It took ~10 minutes for ArgoCD to timeout and then a further few minutes debugging the problem. As a Konstruct employee, I know what I'm doing but still lost ~20 minutes. For a user in the wider world, they would likely lose much more time and would likely (wrongly) blame Kubefirst.

Is this missing feature preventing you from using kubefirst?

  • Yes

Code of Conduct

  • I agree to follow this project's Code of Conduct
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
feature Something new
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant