Notification merge requestshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests2023-08-18T15:25:22Zhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/149ibm integration test updated for service mesh change2023-08-18T15:25:22ZBhushan Radeibm integration test updated for service mesh changeshould_return400_when_makingHttpRequestWithoutToken(org.opengroup.osdu.notification.api.TestPubsubEndpointHMAC): POST: push-handlers/records-changed RBAC: access denied expected:<401> but was:<403>should_return400_when_makingHttpRequestWithoutToken(org.opengroup.osdu.notification.api.TestPubsubEndpointHMAC): POST: push-handlers/records-changed RBAC: access denied expected:<401> but was:<403>M10 - Release 0.13Anuj GuptaBhushan RadeAnuj Guptahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/148netty codec vuln fixed2023-08-18T15:25:23ZGokul Nagarenetty codec vuln fixedM10 - Release 0.13Anuj GuptaShrikant GargAnuj Guptahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/147fix IT and istio dns host2023-08-18T15:25:25ZNikhil Singh[MicroSoft]fix IT and istio dns hostThis MR introduces IT fix along with istio dns host usage.This MR introduces IT fix along with istio dns host usage.M10 - Release 0.13Nikhil Singh[MicroSoft]Nikhil Singh[MicroSoft]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/144(GONRG-3831) GCP Notification: OQM mapper2021-12-13T12:20:43ZRostislav Dublin (EPAM)(GONRG-3831) GCP Notification: OQM mapper## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [X] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [X] GCP
- [ ] IBM
...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [X] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [X] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
Notification works with Message Broker directly
## What is the new/expected behavior?
Notification will work with MQ through mapper/driver abstraction
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
yes
## Any other useful information
### Features of implementation
This is a universal solution created using EPAM OQM mapper technology.
It allows you to work with various implementations of message brokers.
#### Limitations of the current version
In the current version, the mapper is equipped with several drivers to the message brokers:
- Google PubSub;
- RabbitMQ
#### Extensibility
To use any other message broker, implement a driver for it. With an extensible set of drivers, the solution is unrestrictedly universal and portable without modification to the main code.
#### Mapper tuning mechanisms
This service uses specific implementations of DestinationResolvers based on the tenant information provided by the OSDU Partition service.
A total of 2 resolvers are implemented, which are divided into two groups:
##### for universal technologies:
- for RabbitMQ: mappers/oqm/MqTenantOqmDestinationResolver.java
###### Their algorithms are as follows:
- incoming Destination carries data-partition-id
- resolver accesses the Partition service and gets PartitionInfo
- from PartitionInfo resolver retrieves properties for the connection: URL, username, password etc.
- resolver creates a data source, connects to the resource, remembers the datasource
- resolver gives the datasource to the mapper in the Resolution object
##### for native Google Cloud technologies:
- for PubSub: mappers/oqm/PsTenantOqmDestinationResolver.java
###### Their algorithms are similar,
Except that they do not receive special properties from the Partition service for connection, because the location of the resources is unambiguously known - they are in the GCP project. And credentials are also not needed - access to data is made on behalf of the Google Identity SA under which the service itself is launched. Therefore, resolver takes only the value of the **projectId** property from PartitionInfo and uses it to connect to a resource in the corresponding GCP project.M10 - Release 0.13Rustam Lotsmanenko (EPAM)rustam_lotsmanenko@epam.comRiabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]Dmitrii Novikov (EPAM)Rustam Lotsmanenko (EPAM)rustam_lotsmanenko@epam.comhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/141disabled spring web security2023-08-18T15:25:27ZBhushan Radedisabled spring web securityM10 - Release 0.13Anuj GuptaBhushan RadeAnuj Guptahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/137Aws xuserid fix2023-08-18T15:25:28ZRucha DeshpandeAws xuserid fixM10 - Release 0.13Rucha DeshpandeRucha Deshpandehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/202Removing deprecated pipeline includes2022-03-29T18:45:51ZDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgRemoving deprecated pipeline includesM11 - Release 0.14David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/200Upgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.142022-03-29T17:08:07ZDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgUpgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.14This automated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep the OSDU projects utilizing the latest available code to ensure widespread usage and stability.
However, any...This automated MR upgrades the first party libraries (other OSDU libraries) to utilize the latest release.
The intent is to keep the OSDU projects utilizing the latest available code to ensure widespread usage and stability.
However, any library that is older than the previous release will be left as-is, since the upgrade is likely to be more complicated.
Furthermore, the upgrade should only be merged in the CI pipeline reports success.
If this MR has failed, we can spend a little time investigating to see if a trivial upgrade could achieve compatiblity to the new library.
But significant upgrade efforts should not occur on this MR, as part of the release tagging process.
Instead, significant work should be scheduled for a subsequent milestone.
### Dependency Information Before the Upgrade
```
Branch: master
SHA: a5d3fdf7576f6b9e7d9f02790c154bf9edaf0fa4
Maven: 0.14.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/ |
| ----------------------------------------------------- | ------------------ | -------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.14.0-rc2 | 0.0.22 |
| core-lib-gcp | 0.14.0-rc3, 0.11.0 | |
| core-test-lib-gcp | | 0.0.2 |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.13.0 | 0.3.16 |
| obm | 0.13.1-SNAPSHOT | |
| oqm | 0.13.0-SNAPSHOT | |
| os-core-common | 0.14.0-rc3 | 0.3.4, 0.3.6 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.13.0 | 0.13.0 |
| osm | 0.13.0-SNAPSHOT | |
| (3rd Party) net.minidev.json-smart | 2.4.7 | 2.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.12.1, 2.11.1 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.12.1 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.12.1 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.12.1 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2, 2.13.3 |
### Dependency Information After the Upgrade
```
Branch: dependency-upgrade
SHA: 99b2b2c60728614a9d4d4af103aa7fb6c0e384d7
Maven: 0.14.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/ |
| ----------------------------------------------------- | -------------- | -------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.14.0 | 0.0.22 |
| core-lib-gcp | 0.14.0, 0.11.0 | |
| core-test-lib-gcp | | 0.0.2 |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.14.0 | 0.3.16 |
| obm | 0.14.0 | |
| oqm | 0.14.0 | |
| os-core-common | 0.14.0 | 0.3.4, 0.3.6 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.14.0 | 0.14.0 |
| osm | 0.14.0 | |
| (3rd Party) net.minidev.json-smart | 2.4.7 | 2.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.12.1, 2.11.1 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.12.1 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.12.1 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.12.1 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2, 2.13.3 |M11 - Release 0.14https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/199fix readme, delete unwanted properties(GONRG-4634)2022-03-29T08:34:53ZRustam Lotsmanenko (EPAM)rustam_lotsmanenko@epam.comfix readme, delete unwanted properties(GONRG-4634)## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provi...## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [x] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]M11 - Release 0.14Riabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]Riabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/198Fixed error exception2023-08-18T15:24:45ZSanjeev-SLBFixed error exception## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic? NO
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the clou...## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic? NO
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [x] Azure
- [ ] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change? NO
- [YES/NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationM11 - Release 0.14Sanjeev-SLBSanjeev-SLBhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/195Updated the error code for all the failed user dependency errors2023-08-18T15:24:48ZSanjeev-SLBUpdated the error code for all the failed user dependency errors## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud p...## Type of change
- [x] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES/NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [X] Azure
- [ ] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO] NO
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationM11 - Release 0.14Sanjeev-SLBSanjeev-SLBhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/194undertow vul fix2023-08-18T15:24:50ZGokul Nagareundertow vul fixM11 - Release 0.14Shrikant GargShrikant Garghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/192Update DataNotification.md - added deletionType in delete event2022-09-16T07:49:20ZVaishali MangwaniUpdate DataNotification.md - added deletionType in delete event## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [X] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud prov...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [X] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [YES]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [X] AWS
- [X] Azure
- [X] GCP
- [X] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## What is the current behavior?
In deletion event type event type we get "op" : "delete"
## What is the new/expected behavior?
In deletion event type event type we will get additional attribute "deletionType" : "soft" or "deletionType" : "hard"
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
Yes
## Any other useful information
ADR Link - https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/home/-/issues/93M11 - Release 0.14https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/191sensitive property look-up from env variables(GONRG-4404)2022-03-12T18:30:18ZRustam Lotsmanenko (EPAM)rustam_lotsmanenko@epam.comsensitive property look-up from env variables(GONRG-4404)# Merge reques## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [x] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [x...# Merge reques## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [x] Feature
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [x] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]t templateM11 - Release 0.14Riabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]Riabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/190update notification readme and core-common version2022-09-16T07:57:50ZAlok Joshiupdate notification readme and core-common versionPlease refer to this [ADR](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/home/-/issues/81). This is a corresponding documentation (and dependency upgrade) change in Notification service.Please refer to this [ADR](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/home/-/issues/81). This is a corresponding documentation (and dependency upgrade) change in Notification service.M11 - Release 0.14Alok JoshiAlok Joshihttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/189upgrade core lib azure version2023-08-18T15:24:53Zharshit aggarwalupgrade core lib azure versionM11 - Release 0.14harshit aggarwalharshit aggarwalhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/186GONRG-4309: Cost optimization for service2023-08-18T15:24:54ZNastassia Rabeichykava (EPAM)GONRG-4309: Cost optimization for serviceM11 - Release 0.14Oleksandr Kosse (EPAM)Oleksandr Kosse (EPAM)https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/181Adding entries to requests table on notification processing2023-08-18T15:24:56ZSathyanarayanan SaravanamuthuAdding entries to requests table on notification processingAfter moving to SB based consumption, the entries were no more added to request table. This code change is to fill the request tables on processing the notifications.After moving to SB based consumption, the entries were no more added to request table. This code change is to fill the request tables on processing the notifications.M11 - Release 0.14Sathyanarayanan SaravanamuthuSathyanarayanan Saravanamuthuhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/178Remove datastore tenant info provisioning from Notification service (EPAM GON...2022-02-07T09:38:57ZDmitrii Novikov (EPAM)Remove datastore tenant info provisioning from Notification service (EPAM GONRG-4242)## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [x] Feature
https://jiraeu.epam.com/browse/GONRG-4242
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud...## Type of change
- [ ] Bug Fix
- [x] Feature
https://jiraeu.epam.com/browse/GONRG-4242
## Does this introduce a change in the core logic?
- [NO]
## Does this introduce a change in the cloud provider implementation, if so which cloud?
- [ ] AWS
- [ ] Azure
- [x] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES]
## What is the current behavior?
Connected core-lib-gcp token providerM11 - Release 0.14Riabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]Riabokon Stanislav(EPAM)[GCP]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/notification/-/merge_requests/176Changes for m102023-08-18T15:24:58ZKarina CadetteChanges for m10M11 - Release 0.14