Separate UWM and core platform monitoring (part 1)
Version(s): No version for CP
Issue: OBSDOCS-1432
Link to docs preview:
QE review:
- [ ] QE has approved this change.
Additional information:
This is the part 1 split of core platform monitoring (CPM) and user workload monitoring (UWM) procedures. The issue is getting merged to only monitoring-docs-restructure, not to main, therefore this change will not be visible in the documentation.
The tagging is implemented so that once this is moved to two different assemblies, we will still only have one module to maintain. This will ensure content reuse instead of duplication. It also prevents creation of multiple new modules with basically identical content.
This issue also asks for changes in ID, however, in the final product, the two procedures will be in a different assembly, therefore two IDs will not be needed (context parameter will take care of it)
You can see https://github.com/openshift/openshift-docs/pull/83431 for reference.
🤖 Thu Oct 31 07:39:50 - Prow CI generated the docs preview:
https://83854--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-dedicated/latest/observability/monitoring/configuring-the-monitoring-stack.html https://83854--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/observability/monitoring/common-monitoring-configuration-scenarios.html https://83854--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/observability/monitoring/configuring-the-monitoring-stack.html https://83854--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-rosa/latest/observability/monitoring/configuring-the-monitoring-stack.html
https://83854--ocpdocs-pr.netlify.app/openshift-enterprise/latest/observability/monitoring/configuring-the-monitoring-stack.html#assigning-tolerations-to-monitoring-components-uwm_configuring-the-monitoring-stack thanosRuler toleration example in the doc is wrong
metadata:
name: cluster-monitoring-config
namespace: openshift-monitoring
should be
metadata:
name: user-workload-monitoring-config
namespace: openshift-user-workload-monitoring
LGTM, waiting for others to review
/label peer-review-needed
/label peer-review-in-progress
/remove-label peer-review-needed
/label peer-review-needed
:slightly_smiling_face: I think it's best if someone with tooling knowledge reviews this first. @kalexand-rh, would you mind having a quick look at the diffs and leaving some guidance or high-level approval for this PR?
/remove-label peer-review-in-progress
@eromanova97 This is great. The separation is very helpful. I am new to the tag feature; I love it. Seems much easier than the ifevals. I have a few comments. Otherwise LGTM.
/label merge-review-needed
NOTE: the new push is just a rebase, no new changes added.
@eromanova97: all tests passed!
Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.