Search merge requestshttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests2022-12-13T12:22:04Zhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/396Upgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.182022-12-13T12:22:04ZDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgUpgrade First Party Library Dependencies for Release 0.18This 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: c02adb2357e6d8b4d57a9a7c8ce82c0218faffac
Maven: 0.19.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| ------------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.17.0 | 0.13.0-rc6 |
| core-lib-gcp | 0.17.0 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.15.0 | 0.14.0-rc2 |
| obm | 0.17.0 | |
| oqm | 0.17.0 | |
| os-core-common | 0.17.0 | 0.17.0 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.16.0-rc1 | 0.15.2 |
| osm | 0.17.0 | |
| (3rd Party) com.fasterxml.jackson.core.jackson-databind | 2.13.2.2 | 2.13.2.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.springframework.spring-webflux | 5.3.22 | |
| (3rd Party) org.springframework.spring-webmvc | 5.3.22 | 5.3.22 |
### Dependency Information After the Upgrade
```
Branch: dependency-upgrade-2
SHA: d3ccd12845a75da40c2b8db747383fd4fcda92ac
Maven: 0.19.0-SNAPSHOT
```
| Maven Dependencies | _Root_ | testing/integration-tests/ |
| ------------------------------------------------------- | ---------- | -------------------------- |
| core-lib-azure | 0.18.0 | 0.13.0-rc6 |
| core-lib-gcp | 0.18.0 | |
| os-core-lib-aws | 0.15.0 | 0.14.0-rc2 |
| obm | 0.18.0 | |
| oqm | 0.18.0 | |
| os-core-common | 0.18.0 | 0.18.0 |
| os-core-lib-ibm | 0.16.0-rc1 | 0.15.2 |
| osm | 0.18.0 | |
| (3rd Party) com.fasterxml.jackson.core.jackson-databind | 2.13.2.2 | 2.13.2.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-api | 2.17.1 | 2.11.1, 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-core | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-jul | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-slf4j-impl | 2.17.1 | 2.13.3 |
| (3rd Party) org.apache.logging.log4j.log4j-to-slf4j | 2.17.1 | 2.11.2 |
| (3rd Party) org.springframework.spring-webflux | 5.3.22 | |
| (3rd Party) org.springframework.spring-webmvc | 5.3.22 | 5.3.22 |M15 - Release 0.18https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/392Draft: test coverage2023-08-25T22:30:15Zshivani karipeDraft: test coverage## Type of change
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [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 informationshivani karipeshivani karipehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/389Cherry-pick 'Update FOSSA NOTICE' into release/0.182022-12-08T07:00:05ZDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgCherry-pick 'Update FOSSA NOTICE' into release/0.18**Original MR**: !387
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporati...**Original MR**: !387
### This MR is a Cherry Pick into a Release Branch.
After the release branch is first created, any subsequent changes use this process to update the release (often resulting in a new patch tag) without incorporating all changes in the default branch.
These MRs must be approved by the PMC before they are merged, since they alter the scope of the release.
To see more details about the change itself, look at the Original MR listed above.
#### Skipped Pipeline
Normally, pipelines are not executed on the cherry pick branch/MR prior to merging.
This optimization is accepted because the code was tested when it merged into the default branch, and will be tested again in the release branch prior to tagging.
However, if anybody feels that the MR requires further scrutiny -- whether because it had conflicts in the cherry-picking, it interfaces with some drastically altered logic between the branches, or any other reason -- we can run the pipeline here prior to merging.
#### If There's Reason to Run a Pipeline
If you want to see a pipeline result before this merges, first add a comment explaining why you'd like to see the pipeline results so the PMC and others know your thinking.
Then, mark the MR as a Draft MR (using the vertical ellipsis above, choose 'Mark as Draft').
This prevents the MR from being approved & merged accidentally by a busy release coordinator who didn't see your comment.
Finally, if you are a maintainer on the project, launch a pipeline on this branch.
Since this branch is a protected branch and the MR has ~no-detached-pipeline set, all integration tests will run and there's no need for any `trusted-*` branches.
[Launch a Pipeline for this Branch](https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/pipelines/new?ref=cherry-pick-for-387)M15 - Release 0.18David Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orgDavid Diederichd.diederich@opengroup.orghttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/388GONRG-6045: Remove NEG annotation in service2022-12-06T11:34:31ZVolodymyr Pienskoi [EPAM / GCP]GONRG-6045: Remove NEG annotation in serviceServices created in GKE clusters 1.17.6-gke.7 and up with VPC-native traffic routing enabled are annotated automatically with `cloud.google.com/neg: '{"ingress": true}'`. This means that this annotation is not required explicitly and can...Services created in GKE clusters 1.17.6-gke.7 and up with VPC-native traffic routing enabled are annotated automatically with `cloud.google.com/neg: '{"ingress": true}'`. This means that this annotation is not required explicitly and can be removed.
More details in [GKE Load Balancing documentation](https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/concepts/ingress#container-native_load_balancing).Volodymyr Pienskoi [EPAM / GCP]Volodymyr Pienskoi [EPAM / GCP]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/384Az/sk code coverage2022-12-01T12:53:04Zshivani karipeAz/sk code coverage## Type of change
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [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 informationshivani karipeshivani karipehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/383Draft: Az/sk code coverage2022-12-01T12:32:52Zshivani karipeDraft: Az/sk code coverage## Type of change
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [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 informationshivani karipeshivani karipehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/382Draft: added changes to fix azure code coverage2022-12-01T12:24:11Zshivani karipeDraft: added changes to fix azure code coverage## Type of change
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [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 informationshivani karipeshivani karipehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/380adding corelib azure changes for search service2023-08-25T22:30:19ZNishant Vidyasagaradding corelib azure changes for search serviceNishant VidyasagarNishant Vidyasagarhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/378M14 Upgrade2022-11-29T13:57:19ZKamalika SahaM14 Upgrade## Type of change
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [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 informationKamalika SahaKamalika Sahahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/376added changes to fix azure_code_coverage job2022-12-01T16:02:57Zshivani karipeadded changes to fix azure_code_coverage job## Type of change
- [* ] Bug Fix
- [ * ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/deployment-and-operations/infra-azure-provisioning/-/issues/2...## Type of change
- [* ] Bug Fix
- [ * ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/deployment-and-operations/infra-azure-provisioning/-/issues/244
## 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
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## What is the current behavior?
The current code coverage job fails since it has not been implemented
## What is the new/expected behavior?
* This change will fix the azure code coverage job and produce the code coverage results
* Jacoco plugin is used for the code coverage
issue ref: https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/deployment-and-operations/infra-azure-provisioning/-/issues/244M15 - Release 0.18shivani karipeshivani karipehttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/374Increasing Tomcat.maxthread to 4002023-05-13T05:07:54ZAkanksha PrasadIncreasing Tomcat.maxthread to 400## Type of change
- [ yes] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
This change is done so that we can increase rps without getting 503
## Does this introduce a change in the...## Type of change
- [ yes] Bug Fix
- [ ] Feature
**Please provide link to gitlab issue or ADR(Architecture Decision Record)**
This change is done so that we can increase rps without getting 503
## 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
- [yes ] Azure
- [ ] Google Cloud
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [YES/NO] no
## What is the current behavior?
Currently it is enabled for 200 tomcat.server.maxthread and rps is 30 rps
## What is the new/expected behavior?
In new behaviour,increasing the tomcat.server.maxthread to 400 will increase rps and less 503
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationAkanksha PrasadAkanksha Prasadhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/370M14 upgrade2022-11-16T13:01:00ZAnkur RawatM14 upgradeM12 changes into M14M12 changes into M14Ankur RawatAnkur Rawathttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/356Draft: [Do No Merge] Azure Deploy Failure2022-10-13T10:30:31ZThulasi Dass SubramanianDraft: [Do No Merge] Azure Deploy Failure## Do Not Merge
- Testing for Azure Deploy Failure fix## Do Not Merge
- Testing for Azure Deploy Failure fixThulasi Dass SubramanianThulasi Dass Subramanianhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/355Draft: [Do Not Merge] Azure Deploy Failure2022-10-11T11:18:26ZThulasi Dass SubramanianDraft: [Do Not Merge] Azure Deploy Failure## Do Not Merge
- Testing for Azure Deploy Failure Fix## Do Not Merge
- Testing for Azure Deploy Failure Fixhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/354Draft: [Do not Merge] Azure Deploy fix2022-10-11T11:13:26ZThulasi Dass SubramanianDraft: [Do not Merge] Azure Deploy fix## DO NOT MERGE
- Testing for Azure Deploy Failure Fix## DO NOT MERGE
- Testing for Azure Deploy Failure FixThulasi Dass SubramanianThulasi Dass Subramanianhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/353Do not merge2022-10-11T08:04:55ZThulasi Dass SubramanianDo not merge## Type of change
- [ ] 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
- [ ] 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
- [ ] Azure
- [ ] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [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 informationThulasi Dass SubramanianThulasi Dass Subramanianhttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/335Draft: Add readinessProbe [GONRG-5632]2022-09-20T07:23:40ZMikhail Piatliou (EPAM)Draft: Add readinessProbe [GONRG-5632]## 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
- [ ] IB...## 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]Mikhail Piatliou (EPAM)Mikhail Piatliou (EPAM)https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/333Draft: [DO_NOT_MERGE] Testing swagger integration curl2022-09-09T16:59:25ZArturo Hernandez [EPAM]Draft: [DO_NOT_MERGE] Testing swagger integration curl## Type of change
- Test for CICD swagger test in azure.## Type of change
- Test for CICD swagger test in azure.Arturo Hernandez [EPAM]Arturo Hernandez [EPAM]https://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/317m12 Branch Search Service API sending out 500 error code for IllegalArgumentE...2022-08-18T11:23:27ZKamalika Saham12 Branch Search Service API sending out 500 error code for IllegalArgumentException type## 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
- [x] Azure
- [ ] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [NO]
## What is the current behavior?
## What is the new/expected behavior?
## Have you added/updated Unit Tests and Integration Tests?
## Any other useful informationKamalika SahaKamalika Sahahttps://community.opengroup.org/osdu/platform/system/search-service/-/merge_requests/316m10 Branch Search Service API sending out 500 error code for IllegalArgumentE...2022-08-18T11:23:06ZKamalika Saham10 Branch Search Service API sending out 500 error code for IllegalArgumentException type## 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
- [x] Azure
- [ ] GCP
- [ ] IBM
## Does this introduce a breaking change?
- [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 informationKamalika SahaKamalika Saha