storage: change storage pool to Up state when cancel storage migration by weizhouapache · Pull Request #11773 · apache/cloudstack

weizhouapache · 2025-10-01T14:56:17Z

Description

This PR may fix#11764

Types of changes

Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
Build/CI
Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Major
Minor

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

weizhouapache · 2025-10-01T15:00:42Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-10-01T15:02:04Z

@weizhouapache 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 · 2025-10-01T15:03:45Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 16.17%. Comparing base (c631d6a) to head (aa725cb).
⚠️ Report is 12 commits behind head on 4.20.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ain/java/com/cloud/storage/StorageManagerImpl.java	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
...cycle/CloudStackPrimaryDataStoreLifeCycleImpl.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️
...a/com/cloud/storage/StoragePoolAutomationImpl.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@ Coverage Diff @@## 4.20 #11773 +/- ##
============================================
- Coverage 16.17% 16.17% -0.01% + Complexity 13298 13295 -3 
============================================
Files 5656 5656 Lines 498242 498271 +29 Branches 60458 60466 +8 ============================================
- Hits 80584 80583 -1 - Misses 408686 408719 +33 + Partials 8972 8969 -3

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	`4.00% <ø> (ø)`
unittests	`17.02% <0.00%> (-0.01%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

blueorangutan · 2025-10-01T16:25:19Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 15258

weizhouapache · 2025-10-01T17:34:42Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2025-10-01T17:36:04Z

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

blueorangutan · 2025-10-02T09:17:07Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-14507)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 53287 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr11773-t14507-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 141 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File

…gration

DaanHoogland

I can not see whether this would fix the issue. It probably would and testing must show. But in general the cancel maintenance method is 130 lines and three phases, two of which should be structured and modularised more to be easier to read and control, what they do.

weizhouapache · 2025-10-03T09:43:11Z

I can not see whether this would fix the issue. It probably would and testing must show.

yes, this needs testing.
actually in the life cycle of other storage pool, the logic is the same, which I think makes sense:

 dataStoreHelper.cancelMaintain(store);
storagePoolAutmation.cancelMaintain(store);

except CloudStackPrimaryDataStoreLifeCycleImpl, I have no idea why

But in general the cancel maintenance method is 130 lines and three phases, two of which should be structured and modularised more to be easier to read and control, what they do.

+1, please go ahead with the refactoring

DaanHoogland · 2025-10-03T10:35:41Z

+1, please go ahead with the refactoring

will do, but if not on this branch it will be conflicts.

DaanHoogland

clgtm and tested in a lab env

weizhouapache · 2025-10-06T09:04:32Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-10-06T09:06:03Z

@weizhouapache 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.

blueorangutan · 2025-10-06T10:12:53Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✔️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 15300

weizhouapache · 2025-10-06T10:14:08Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-10-06T10:16:03Z

@weizhouapache 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.

blueorangutan · 2025-10-06T11:25:58Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 15301

weizhouapache · 2025-10-06T11:55:35Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2025-10-06T11:56:04Z

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

blueorangutan · 2025-10-07T03:40:56Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-14542)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 53635 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr11773-t14542-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 141 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File

vishesh92

clgtm. didn't test.

DaanHoogland · 2025-10-07T07:26:33Z

+1, please go ahead with the refactoring

#11789

DaanHoogland · 2025-10-07T07:29:19Z

yes, this needs testing.

tested in for VMs and systemVMs. VMs are just stopped and restarted when the pool is back.

I will test some more with VM-HA.

DaanHoogland · 2025-10-07T12:11:30Z

A remaining issue is that VMs with HA-offerings are stopped as well during bringing into maintenance. these are started again after canceling maintenance.
VRs have their volumes migrated so the same should happen for HA-VMs.

DaanHoogland · 2025-10-07T12:11:55Z

A remaining issue is that VMs with HA-offerings are stopped as well during bringing into maintenance. these are started again after canceling maintenance. VRs have their volumes migrated so the same should happen for HA-VMs.

this is not an issue with this PR. I think we are good to go.

weizhouapache · 2025-10-07T14:59:43Z

@slavkap
do you have time to test this ?

slavkap · 2025-10-07T17:40:38Z

@weizhouapache, yes, I will test it tomorrow

weizhouapache · 2025-10-08T08:26:10Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-10-08T08:28:05Z

@weizhouapache 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.

blueorangutan · 2025-10-08T10:20:27Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 15339

weizhouapache · 2025-10-08T10:54:30Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2025-10-08T10:56:09Z

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

slavkap

code LGTM, tested with NFS and StorPool primary storage

weizhouapache · 2025-10-08T13:34:29Z

code LGTM, tested with NFS and StorPool primary storage

great, thanks for the testing @slavkap

weizhouapache · 2025-10-08T13:34:53Z

Merging based on approvals and manual tests

thanks @DaanHoogland @slavkap @vishesh92

blueorangutan · 2025-10-09T03:19:19Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-14581)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 54858 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr11773-t14581-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 141 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File

apache#11773) * storage: change storage pool to Up state when cancel storage migration * Update 11773: connect host to shared pool after cancelling storage migration * Update 11773: update db only * Update 11773: skip capacity update for storpool

storage: change storage pool to Up state when cancel storage migration
70804de

boring-cyborgBot added component:primary-storage component:storage labels Oct 1, 2025

weizhouapache mentioned this pull request Oct 1, 2025
Cannot cancel maintenance mode of a primary storage v4.21 #11764
Closed

weizhouapache added this to the 4.20.2 milestone Oct 1, 2025

weizhouapache linked an issue Oct 2, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
Cannot cancel maintenance mode of a primary storage v4.21 #11764
Closed

Update 11773: connect host to shared pool after cancelling storage mi…
4313060
…gration

DaanHoogland reviewed Oct 3, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadserver/src/main/java/com/cloud/storage/StoragePoolAutomationImpl.java Outdated

DaanHoogland approved these changes Oct 3, 2025
View reviewed changes

Update 11773: update db only
f2d41f8

vishesh92 approved these changes Oct 7, 2025
View reviewed changes

DaanHoogland added the status:ready-for-merge label Oct 7, 2025

slavkap reviewed Oct 8, 2025
View reviewed changes

Comment threadserver/src/main/java/com/cloud/storage/StorageManagerImpl.java

Update 11773: skip capacity update for storpool
aa725cb

slavkap approved these changes Oct 8, 2025
View reviewed changes

weizhouapache marked this pull request as ready for review October 8, 2025 13:33

weizhouapache merged commit 89d2b17 into apache:4.20Oct 8, 2025
25 of 26 checks passed

DaanHoogland deleted the 4.20-fix-cancel-storage-migration branch October 8, 2025 13:38

Uh oh!

Conversation

weizhouapache commented Oct 1, 2025

Description

Types of changes

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

codecovBot commented Oct 1, 2025• edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 1, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 2, 2025

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 6, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

vishesh92 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

slavkap commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 8, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 8, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Oct 8, 2025

Uh oh!

weizhouapache commented Oct 8, 2025

codecovBot commented Oct 1, 2025•
edited
Loading