-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 169
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
Consistent storage account naming between dev and prod #3457
Closed
cadenmarchese
wants to merge
1
commit into
Azure:master
from
cadenmarchese:consistent-storageaccount-naming
Closed
Consistent storage account naming between dev and prod #3457
cadenmarchese
wants to merge
1
commit into
Azure:master
from
cadenmarchese:consistent-storageaccount-naming
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
cadenmarchese
requested review from
jewzaam,
bennerv,
hawkowl,
rogbas,
jharrington22,
cblecker,
UlrichSchlueter,
s-amann,
SudoBrendan,
Shivkumar13,
yjst2012,
jaitaiwan,
anshulvermapatel,
hlipsig,
dofinn and
tiguelu
as code owners
March 14, 2024 13:44
Please rebase pull request. |
cadenmarchese
force-pushed
the
consistent-storageaccount-naming
branch
from
March 14, 2024 13:54
22aea2d
to
a76c949
Compare
cadenmarchese
added
ready-for-review
chainsaw
Pull requests or issues owned by Team Chainsaw
size-small
Size small
labels
Mar 15, 2024
/azp run ci |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
/azp run e2e |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
cadenmarchese
force-pushed
the
consistent-storageaccount-naming
branch
from
March 15, 2024 17:53
a76c949
to
b0d3c88
Compare
/azp run ci |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
/azp run e2e |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 1 pipeline(s). |
cadenmarchese
force-pushed
the
consistent-storageaccount-naming
branch
from
March 18, 2024 13:06
b0d3c88
to
a639a83
Compare
/azp run ci,e2e |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s). |
/azp run ci,e2e |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s). |
cadenmarchese
force-pushed
the
consistent-storageaccount-naming
branch
from
March 18, 2024 20:53
063c377
to
a639a83
Compare
cadenmarchese
force-pushed
the
consistent-storageaccount-naming
branch
from
March 19, 2024 14:41
a639a83
to
db0ebd8
Compare
/azp run ci,e2e |
Azure Pipelines successfully started running 2 pipeline(s). |
Closing this one in favor of #3467 for the purposes of getting e2e to pass. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Labels
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Which issue this PR addresses:
N/a
What this PR does / why we need it:
https://msazure.visualstudio.com/AzureRedHatOpenShift/_git/ARO-Pipelines/pullrequest/9703384?_a=files changed the way that the prod storage accounts are named (using storageAccountDomain + "oic" rather than prefix + "oidc" + region). This PR is meant to align our dev storage accounts to that as much as possible so that they follow the same naming convention.
In the case of the shared dev environments (v4-eastus, v4-westeurope, etc) those will likely have to stay as-is using the resource group name since in a local or shared dev environment there is no storageAccountDomain or RP-config defined for those environments.
Test plan for issue:
Is there any documentation that needs to be updated for this PR?
How do you know this will function as expected in production?