Update more details-Observability service (in review)

[PoornimaSingour]

Update more details related to StorageClass in Enabling the Observability service Section.

BUG : https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ACM-21655

• Modified [Prerequisites] section (https://docs.redhat.com/en/documentation/red_hat_advanced_cluster_management_for_kubernetes/2.12/html-single/observability/index#prerequisites-observability)
  Before : You must define a storage class in the MultiClusterObservability custom resource, if there is no default storage class specified.
  After : - You must specify the storageConfig.storageClass field in the MultiClusterObservability custom resource if you do not want to use the platform's default StorageClass.

• Modified 1.3.2.3. Creating the MultiClusterObservability custom resource

Added:

Note: By default if you do not define the storageConfig.storageClass field in the MultiClusterObservability custom resource, platforms default StorageClass will be populated in the storageConfig section of MultiClusterObservability. For example for AWS default storageClass will be gp2. You can verify default storageClass using below command:

$ oc get storageClass
NAME                PROVISIONER       RECLAIMPOLICY   VOLUMEBINDINGMODE      ALLOWVOLUMEEXPANSION   AGE
gp2-csi             ebs.csi.aws.com   Delete          WaitForFirstConsumer   true                   151m
gp3-csi (default)   ebs.csi.aws.com   Delete          WaitForFirstConsumer   true                   151m

Also $ was missing in front of all the command so added that as well.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: PoornimaSingour

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[PoornimaSingour]

/label peer-review-in-needed

[openshift-ci]

@PoornimaSingour: The label(s) /label peer-review-in-progress cannot be applied. These labels are supported: acknowledge-critical-fixes-only, platform/aws, platform/azure, platform/baremetal, platform/google, platform/libvirt, platform/openstack, ga, tide/merge-method-merge, tide/merge-method-rebase, tide/merge-method-squash, px-approved, docs-approved, qe-approved, ux-approved, no-qe, downstream-change-needed, rebase/manual, cluster-config-api-changed, approved, backport-risk-assessed, bugzilla/valid-bug, cherry-pick-approved, jira/valid-bug, stability-fix-approved, staff-eng-approved. Is this label configured under labels -> additional_labels or labels -> restricted_labels in plugin.yaml?

In response to this:

/label peer-review-in-progress

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.

[PoornimaSingour]

/label peer-review-in-needed

[openshift-ci]

@PoornimaSingour: The label(s) /label peer-review-in-needed cannot be applied. These labels are supported: acknowledge-critical-fixes-only, platform/aws, platform/azure, platform/baremetal, platform/google, platform/libvirt, platform/openstack, ga, tide/merge-method-merge, tide/merge-method-rebase, tide/merge-method-squash, px-approved, docs-approved, qe-approved, ux-approved, no-qe, downstream-change-needed, rebase/manual, cluster-config-api-changed, approved, backport-risk-assessed, bugzilla/valid-bug, cherry-pick-approved, jira/valid-bug, stability-fix-approved, staff-eng-approved. Is this label configured under labels -> additional_labels or labels -> restricted_labels in plugin.yaml?

In response to this:

/label peer-review-in-needed

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.

[swopebe]

@PoornimaSingour thanks for the PR, however, can you point us to the JIRA issue for the doc team that reflects this change?
We cannot start peer review or tech review without tacking the change/understanding the change via a doc issue.

If no issue was opened, you can open one from this procedure:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YTqpZRH54Bnn4WJ2nZmjaCoiRtqmrc2w6DdQxe_yLZ8/edit?tab=t.0#heading=h.nmome2yn9lvr

[PoornimaSingour]

HI @swopebe Yes here is the JIRA https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ACM-21655. DO let me know if any details are needed.

[swopebe]

Thanks, we will pick this up as soon as we can. We generally don't add $ to the commands in ACM doc, we never really have (this content was moved from IBM and we stuck to those practices.) I know OCP adds it.

[swopebe]

remove $

[swopebe]

keep consistent throughout. This topic should have "required access:" at the top, to fit with the ACM format. -- just checked and it does.

[swopebe]

This file also has ROKS in it as a product name, which is against company standards so that needs to change, as well.

[swopebe]

Suggested change

	*Note:* By default if you do not define the `storageConfig.storageClass` field in the `MultiClusterObservability` custom resource, platforms default `StorageClass` will be populated in the storageConfig section of `MultiClusterObservability`. For example for AWS default storageClass will be gp2. You can verify default storageClass using below command:
	*Note:* By default, if you do not define the `storageConfig.storageClass` field in the `MultiClusterObservability` custom resource, platform default `StorageClass` fields are populated in the `storageConfig` section of the `MultiClusterObservability` resource. For example, AWS default `storageClass` is set to `gp2`. You can verify default `storageClass` by running the following command:

[swopebe]

At ACM docs, we try to follow company and industry standards: present tense, coding non-English words that cannot be translated bc it is part of the code, and no bidirectional language like "below" that alienates a non-sighted user. See those changes.

[swopebe]

Suggested change

	All the pods in `open-cluster-management-observability` namespace for Thanos, Grafana and Alertmanager are created. All the managed clusters connected to the {acm-short} hub cluster are enabled to send metrics back to the {acm-short} Observability service.
	All the pods in `open-cluster-management-observability` namespace for Thanos, Grafana, and Alertmanager are created. All the managed clusters connected to the {acm-short} hub cluster are enabled to send metrics back to the {acm-short} Observability service.

[swopebe]

line 505 really should not be here--we don't know that they "are created"; for a while some writers were writing this in place of "verification steps" (this is not a verification step) without checking in for peer review--we have stopped doing that. I think this should be removed. You don't know that the pods are created.