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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

[Feature/multi_tenancy] Add more missing tenant ids in requests #2959

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Sep 17, 2024
Merged

[Feature/multi_tenancy] Add more missing tenant ids in requests #2959

merged 2 commits into from
Sep 17, 2024

Conversation

dbwiddis
Copy link
Member

@dbwiddis dbwiddis commented Sep 16, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Description

Adds tenant ID to a few requests that were missing them.

NOTE: included a TODO temporarily working around model controller accidentally migrated to sdkClient in #2585. I'll follow up with another PR to remove it.

Check List

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.
For more information on following Developer Certificate of Origin and signing off your commits, please check here.

dhrubo-os
dhrubo-os reviewed Sep 16, 2024
View reviewed changes
plugin/src/main/java/org/opensearch/ml/action/models/DeleteModelTransportAction.java Outdated
@@ -355,7 +373,9 @@ private void deleteModelChunksAndController(
// for remote model we don't need to delete model chunks so reducing one latch countdown.
countDownLatch.countDown();
}
deleteController(modelId, isHidden, countDownActionListener);
// TODO This uses remote client but we haven't implemented it anywhere else?!
// deleteController(modelId, isHidden, countDownActionListener);
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I assume you will reverse the code for controller deletion and then enable this, right?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I assume you will reverse the code for controller deletion and then enable this, right?

Yep, as mentioned in the original comment.

I'll put it back to its pre #2585 state. If there are any workarounds still needed, I understand a permanent fix is coming with feature-gating in #2652

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Except that commenting it out is causing tests to fail. Let me pull it back out of this PR and address separately.

@dhrubo-os dhrubo-os merged commit b26d8b4 into opensearch-project:feature/multi_tenancy Sep 17, 2024
12 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@dhrubo-os dhrubo-os dhrubo-os approved these changes

@b4sjoo b4sjoo Awaiting requested review from b4sjoo b4sjoo is a code owner

@jngz-es jngz-es Awaiting requested review from jngz-es jngz-es is a code owner

@model-collapse model-collapse Awaiting requested review from model-collapse model-collapse is a code owner

@rbhavna rbhavna Awaiting requested review from rbhavna rbhavna is a code owner

@ylwu-amzn ylwu-amzn Awaiting requested review from ylwu-amzn ylwu-amzn is a code owner

@zane-neo zane-neo Awaiting requested review from zane-neo zane-neo is a code owner

@Zhangxunmt Zhangxunmt Awaiting requested review from Zhangxunmt Zhangxunmt is a code owner

@austintlee austintlee Awaiting requested review from austintlee austintlee is a code owner

@HenryL27 HenryL27 Awaiting requested review from HenryL27 HenryL27 is a code owner

@samuel-oci samuel-oci Awaiting requested review from samuel-oci samuel-oci is a code owner

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@dbwiddis @dhrubo-os