[radar-output] Fix path format config

[mpgxvii]

Description of the change

• Fixes path format config to allow specifying format of restructured files according to: https://github.com/RADAR-base/radar-output-restructure/blob/main/src/main/java/org/radarbase/output/config/PathConfig.kt#L20
  Currently when we update the values, the configmap is set as:

    # Path settings
    paths:
      # Additional properties
      properties:
        format: "${projectId}/${userId}/${topic}/${time:yyyyMMdd}${attempt}${extension}"

It should be:

    # Path settings
    paths:
      # Additional properties
      path:
        format: "${projectId}/${userId}/${topic}/${time:yyyyMMdd}${attempt}${extension}"

Benefits

Possible drawbacks

Applicable issues

• fixes #

Additional information

Checklist

• Chart version bumped in Chart.yaml according to semver.
• Variables are documented in the README.md
• Title of the PR starts with chart name (e.g. [<name_of_the_chart>])

[github-actions]

Great PR! Please pay attention to the following items before merging:

Files matching charts/*/values.yaml:

• Is the PR adding a new container? Please reviewer, add it to the models (internal process)
• Is the PR adding a new parameter? Please, ensure it’s documented in the README.md

This is an automatically generated QA checklist based on modified files.

[yatharthranjan]

how was this working in previous deployments, was there a change that broke it?

[yatharthranjan]

According to code here - https://github.com/RADAR-base/radar-output-restructure/blob/4a7a3c79ea3797fdacd8cdabe6426e759e7bd1fe/src/main/java/org/radarbase/output/config/PathConfig.kt#L49

It should pass the properties to pathformatter too.

[mpgxvii]

According to code here - https://github.com/RADAR-base/radar-output-restructure/blob/4a7a3c79ea3797fdacd8cdabe6426e759e7bd1fe/src/main/java/org/radarbase/output/config/PathConfig.kt#L49

It should pass the properties to pathformatter too.

Ah yes but it seems to be only overriding the properties object rather than the format and plugin values?

[yatharthranjan]

ah i see, good point. I was just wondering how was it working previously if there were no changes to the code?

Given that old deployments also have this configured, should we keep the property names same in the helm chart?