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

feat: splitup the policy creation if too many parameters are created … #1050

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

lenderom
Copy link

When creating a large set of parameters the maxium policy size of is exceeded:

image

This PR improves the parameter policy creation by splitting up the policy, if it would exceed the maximum policy size.

Additionally the property keySeperator was renamed to keySeparator to match flattenSeparator.

…for one policy

Signed-off-by: lennartrommeiss <lennart.rommeiss@deutschebahn.com>
@lenderom lenderom marked this pull request as ready for review August 23, 2024 11:53
src/SopsSync.ts Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Signed-off-by: lennartrommeiss <lennart.rommeiss@deutschebahn.com>
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 23, 2024

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 75.70%. Comparing base (8caaadb) to head (082e6d7).

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1050   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   75.70%   75.70%           
=======================================
  Files           3        3           
  Lines         354      354           
=======================================
  Hits          268      268           
  Misses         49       49           
  Partials       37       37           
Flag Coverage Δ
go-lambda 75.70% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@lenderom
Copy link
Author

I would like to test a prebuild version now, to check if it work's like expected.

@lenderom
Copy link
Author

I tested it, resulting in a different error. The policy split up worked, but now the respone object of the custom resource is too large:

image

@lenderom lenderom marked this pull request as draft August 23, 2024 13:44
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