Skip to content

Conversation

@tataruty
Copy link
Contributor

@tataruty tataruty commented Dec 3, 2025

Proposed changes

Problem: Need to track ProxySettingsPolicy telemetry
Solution:
add a product telemetry field to track the usage of ProxySettingsPolicy
update product telemetry doc with this new tracking information

Testing: unit tests.

TODO testing

Please focus on (optional): If you any specific areas where you would like reviewers to focus their attention or provide
specific feedback, add them here.

Closes #4304

Checklist

Before creating a PR, run through this checklist and mark each as complete.

  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING doc
  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • I have checked that all unit tests pass after adding my changes
  • I have updated necessary documentation
  • I have rebased my branch onto main
  • I will ensure my PR is targeting the main branch and pulling from my branch from my own fork

Release notes

NONE

@tataruty tataruty requested a review from a team as a code owner December 3, 2025 19:03
@github-actions github-actions bot added enhancement New feature or request tests Pull requests that update tests labels Dec 3, 2025
Comment on lines +113 to +118
// GatewayAttachedProxySettingsPolicyCount is the number of relevant ProxySettingsPolicies
// attached at the Gateway level.
GatewayAttachedProxySettingsPolicyCount int64
// RouteAttachedProxySettingsPolicyCount is the number of relevant ProxySettingsPolicies
// attached at the Route level.
RouteAttachedProxySettingsPolicyCount int64
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

something to note that might make sense when you test later on, the order we send data over in data.avdl can't actually change. XCDF pipeline won't allow us to change the order, so all additions need to be appended, meaning you'll run into issues adding the count to this struct since its autogenerated. You'll need to add it outside of the struct like i do with inferencepoolCount.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yeah, i've already noticed it here in unit tests.. was a bit strange to fix the order :D
So, you mean that order should be same as in the tests or as in the fields list here?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The avdl file, needs to have its additional fields appended. Since that file is autogenerated, we'll need to add these new policy count fields to a different place so the autogenerated file is correct.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

so no changes needed? I just wanted to add 16, 17, but then noticed that 16 is used for inference and used 17, 18 instead.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Sorry its a little confusing, but not quite. In the data.avdl file that is changed by this PR, we've added these two fields:

long? GatewayAttachedProxySettingsPolicyCount = null;
long? RouteAttachedProxySettingsPolicyCount = null;

However, these were added inbetween an existing: long? GatewayAttachedNpCount = null; and long? NginxPodCount = null;.

This disrupts the order and does not follow the rule set by the xcdf folks that when we change the avdl file, the additional fields have to be appended.

We'll need to find a way to add these new fields at the bottom of the auto-generated avdl file.

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 don't see how it can be done, if ProxySettingsPolicy is inside NGFResourceCount, and it is in the middle of the generated structure

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Image

Copy link
Contributor

@salonichf5 salonichf5 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just FYI: merge this PR after you have tested the feature on prod data

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

enhancement New feature or request tests Pull requests that update tests

Projects

Status: 🆕 New

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants