-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
Storage pool response improvements #10740
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
base: 4.19
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Storage pool response improvements #10740
Conversation
… update capacityBytes and capacityIops if applicable while creating storage pool
…th the capacityiops response parameter and createStoragePool cmd request parameter (existing disksizetotal parameter in the storage pool response can be deprecated)
@blueorangutan package |
@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## 4.19 #10740 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 15.17% 15.16% -0.01%
- Complexity 11332 11334 +2
============================================
Files 5415 5416 +1
Lines 474893 474976 +83
Branches 57920 57935 +15
============================================
+ Hits 72046 72051 +5
- Misses 394792 394871 +79
+ Partials 8055 8054 -1
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 13079 |
…s table while creating storage pool as well, for consistency - as these are updated with during update storage pool
@blueorangutan package |
@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 13094 |
@blueorangutan test |
@sureshanaparti a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
[SF] Trillian test result (tid-13037)
|
Description
This PR has the following storage pool response improvements (addresses #8731):
capacitybytes in the storage_pool table is updated during the following events:
and update storage pool cmd persists the capacityBytes and capacityIops in the storage_pool_details table, and these values are not updated/synced (so, for consistency, create storage pool also persists the capacityBytes and capacityIops in the storage_pool_details table).
Types of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity
Feature/Enhancement Scale
Bug Severity
Screenshots (if appropriate):
How Has This Been Tested?
Tested create storage pool (NFS) with capacitybytes, capacityiops and some details.
Create storage pool (capacitybytes synced with the details from ModifyStoragePoolAnswer, detail parameter doesn't change) =>
List storage pool =>
Update storage pool (capacitybytes and capacityiops, actual and detail parameters updated) =>
List storage pool (capacitybytes doesn't sync-ed with stats collector yet) =>
List storage pool (capacitybytes sync-ed with stats collector, detail parameter doesn't change) =>
DB =>
How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?