K8SPXC-1683: add validation for PiTR fields#2398
Open
nmarukovich wants to merge 11 commits intomainfrom
Open
Conversation
nmarukovich
requested review from
egegunes,
gkech,
hors,
mayankshah1607,
oksana-grishchenko and
pooknull
as code owners
egegunes
changed the title
egegunes
requested changes
Mar 16, 2026
| // +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.type != 'latest' || (self.date == '' && self.gtid == '')",message="Date and GTID should not be set when type is 'latest'" | ||
| type PITR struct { | ||
| BackupSource *PXCBackupStatus `json:"backupSource"` | ||
| // +kubebuilder:validation:Enum=latest;date;transaction;skip |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
are you sure this is the right format? in other places we do +kubebuilder:validation:Enum={latest,date,transaction,skip}
…ator into K8SPXC-1683_add_validation
egegunes
requested changes
Mar 17, 2026
Contributor
egegunes
left a comment
egegunes
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@nmarukovich please check pitr tests
gkech
reviewed
Mar 17, 2026
Comment on lines
+32
to
+34
| // +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.type != 'date' || (self.date != '' && self.date.matches('^[0-9]{4}-(0[1-9]|1[0-2])-(0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01]) ([01][0-9]|2[0-3]):[0-5][0-9]:[0-5][0-9]$'))",message="Date is required for type 'date' and should be in format YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS with valid ranges (MM: 01-12, DD: 01-31, HH: 00-23, MM/SS: 00-59)" | ||
| // +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="(self.type != 'transaction' && self.type != 'skip') || self.gtid != ''",message="GTID is required for types 'transaction' and 'skip'" | ||
| // +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.type != 'latest' || (self.date == '' && self.gtid == '')",message="Date and GTID should not be set when type is 'latest'" |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should create unit tests for these validations to ensure them
| Unsafe UnsafeFlags `json:"unsafeFlags,omitempty"` | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.type != 'date' || (self.date != '' && self.date.matches('^[0-9]{4}-(0[1-9]|1[0-2])-(0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01]) ([01][0-9]|2[0-3]):[0-5][0-9]:[0-5][0-9]$'))",message="Date is required for type 'date' and should be in format YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS with valid ranges (MM: 01-12, DD: 01-31, HH: 00-23, MM/SS: 00-59)" |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is it possible to use one of built-ins for date validation, described here? https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/cel/#kubernetes-format-library
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As I can see we can't use it. We need format const format = "2006-01-02 15:04:05"
and built-in datetime format validates RFC3339 (YYYY-MM-DDTHH:MM:SSZ).
…ator into K8SPXC-1683_add_validation
egegunes
requested changes
Mar 19, 2026
Comment on lines
+107
to
+133
| // Validate checks PITR fields consistency. | ||
| // The same rules are enforced at CRD level via x-kubernetes-validations (CEL). | ||
| func (p *PITR) Validate() error { | ||
| switch p.Type { | ||
| case "latest": | ||
| if p.Date != "" { | ||
| return errors.New("date should not be set when type is 'latest'") | ||
| } | ||
| if p.GTID != "" { | ||
| return errors.New("gtid should not be set when type is 'latest'") | ||
| } | ||
| case "date": | ||
| if p.Date == "" { | ||
| return errors.New("date is required for type 'date'") | ||
| } | ||
| if !pitrDateRegexp.MatchString(p.Date) { | ||
| return errors.New("date should be in format YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS with valid ranges (MM: 01-12, DD: 01-31, HH: 00-23, MM/SS: 00-59)") | ||
| } | ||
| case "transaction", "skip": | ||
| if p.GTID == "" { | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("gtid is required for type %q", p.Type) | ||
| } | ||
| default: | ||
| return fmt.Errorf("unknown type %q: must be one of latest, date, transaction, skip", p.Type) | ||
| } | ||
| return nil | ||
| } |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
why do we duplicate validation rules?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@gkech asked to add unit test. and we use this in unit test (I can add integration one instead)
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
doesn't this mean that we test what we don't use?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
it means, that if we want to have unit test we need to actually duplicate the behaviour.
If we can test it in any other way and you ok with integration test, I will update PR.
gkech
reviewed
Mar 20, 2026
| Unsafe UnsafeFlags `json:"unsafeFlags,omitempty"` | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // +kubebuilder:validation:XValidation:rule="self.type != 'date' || (has(self.date) && self.date.matches('^[0-9]{4}-(0[1-9]|1[0-2])-(0[1-9]|[12][0-9]|3[01]) ([01][0-9]|2[0-3]):[0-5][0-9]:[0-5][0-9]$'))",message="Date is required for type 'date' and should be in format YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS with valid ranges (MM: 01-12, DD: 01-31, HH: 00-23, MM/SS: 00-59)" |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since we discussed the kubebuilder validation testing through envtest, are we going to update that test in this PR?
egegunes
reviewed
Mar 30, 2026
| Entry("type transaction with gtid", "valid-transaction", &pxcv1.PITR{Type: "transaction", GTID: "abc123:1-10"}), | ||
| ) | ||
|
|
||
| DescribeTable("invalid PITR configurations", |
egegunes
approved these changes
Mar 30, 2026
Collaborator
commit: fa6f4d5 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
CHANGE DESCRIPTION
Problem:
Short explanation of the problem.
Add validation for PITR fields.
Cause:
Short explanation of the root cause of the issue if applicable.
Solution:
Short explanation of the solution we are providing with this PR.
CHECKLIST
Jira
Needs Doc) and QA (Needs QA)?Tests
compare/*-oc.yml)?Config/Logging/Testability