✨ Add ClusterFilter to ClusterCache Options

[lentzi90]

What this PR does / why we need it:

This allows filtering the Clusters that are handled by the cache. It can be used for example by providers that only want to cache Clusters of the relevant type to them.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #12657

/area clustercache

[sivchari]

Please write the test about this.

[lentzi90]

Now maybe the code looks better?
(I'll get to the tests also, but it will probably be next week)

[sbueringer]

Now maybe the code looks better? (I'll get to the tests also, but it will probably be next week)

Yup!

I'm wondering if we need test coverage for cases where the filter returns different results for the same cluster over time, as that seems to be supported now?

[lentzi90]

My naive attempt to test this did not go so well 😓
I guess it is now failing because after I change the label, the cluster is still cached. So I would need to manipulate the time or something to get to a point when the cluster is no longer there.
I'm not sure that is the way to go. Any suggestions?

[sbueringer]

My naive attempt to test this did not go so well 😓 I guess it is now failing because after I change the label, the cluster is still cached. So I would need to manipulate the time or something to get to a point when the cluster is no longer there. I'm not sure that is the way to go. Any suggestions?

The problem is simply that you are trying to patch labels with the status subresource :)

g.Expect(env.Status().Patch(ctx, testCluster, patch)).To(Succeed())

(in l.129 + l.143)

[lentzi90]

Oh my 🤦
Thank you!

[sbueringer]

I'll try to take a closer look next week

[sbueringer]

@lentzi90 Do you have time to address the finding above?

[lentzi90]

I forgot about it, but now I think I have addressed it. Looks good according to the tests at least. 🙂

[sbueringer]

I'll have to get back to this after PTO :)

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs.

This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the PR is closed

You can:

• Mark this PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Close this PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[sbueringer]

/remove-lifecycle stale

[sbueringer]

Thank you very much!

/lgtm
/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Details

Git tree hash: 163b8ba54172781fe84d861176017b9a17856045

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sbueringer

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [sbueringer]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment