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

LogPoller Boilerplate #950

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: develop
Choose a base branch
from
Draft

Conversation

EasterTheBunny
Copy link
Contributor

basic boilerplate that connects loader to base log poller

)

type EventSaver interface {
SaveEvent(evt ProgramEvent) error
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This will need to accept a slice of events, more like this:

Suggested change
SaveEvent(evt ProgramEvent) error
SaveEvents(events []ProgramEvent) error

But we already have an ORM method that does basically that, so we can probably just use that unless we want to wrap it with some conversion layer:

     InsertLogs(logs []Log) error

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That works. This method is only a placeholder and can use the ORM method instead.

return p
}

func (p *Service) AddFilter(name string) error {
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This looks like RegisterFilter() we have that implemented and is in review.

Copy link
Contributor

@reductionista reductionista Nov 27, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The interface for LogPoller (as well as all of the data structures that will be passed between QueryKey & LogPoller) is fully specified in the design doc. In principle, that should be enough for QueryKey to be implemented, and should be considered the source of truth--so I'd recommend starting there, and if there is anything missing or that needs to be updated in light of more recent conversations we can discuss.

@cl-sonarqube-production
Copy link

Quality Gate failed Quality Gate failed

Failed conditions
56.3% Coverage on New Code (required ≥ 75%)

See analysis details on SonarQube

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.

2 participants