Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Decouple service (compute) offering and disk offering - #5008
Conversation
3453738 to
296a507Compareharikrishna-patnala
commented
May 10, 2021
@blueorangutan package |
blueorangutan
commented
May 10, 2021
@harikrishna-patnala a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
blueorangutan
commented
May 10, 2021
Packaging result: ✔️ centos7 ✔️ centos8 ✔️ debian. SL-JID 574 |
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
| UniqueNameSearch = createSearchBuilder(); | ||
| UniqueNameSearch.and("name", UniqueNameSearch.entity().getUniqueName(), SearchCriteria.Op.EQ); | ||
| UniqueNameSearch.and("system", UniqueNameSearch.entity().isSystemUse(), SearchCriteria.Op.EQ); | ||
| UniqueNameSearch.and("system_use", UniqueNameSearch.entity().isSystemUse(), SearchCriteria.Op.EQ); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As it will be used more times in this class, could it be extracted to a variable?
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
1b05122 to
dd9dcd7Compareharikrishna-patnala
commented
Jun 18, 2021
@blueorangutan package |
blueorangutan
commented
Jun 18, 2021
@harikrishna-patnala a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
blueorangutan
commented
Jun 18, 2021
Packaging result: ✔️ centos7 ✔️ centos8 ✔️ debian. SL-JID 281 |
harikrishna-patnala
commented
Jun 20, 2021
@blueorangutan package |
blueorangutan
commented
Jun 20, 2021
@harikrishna-patnala a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
blueorangutan
commented
Jun 20, 2021
Packaging result: ✔️ centos7 ✔️ centos8 ✔️ debian. SL-JID 305 |
harikrishna-patnala
commented
Jun 20, 2021
@blueorangutan test matrix |
blueorangutan
commented
Jun 20, 2021
@harikrishna-patnala a Trillian-Jenkins matrix job (centos7 mgmt + xs71, centos7 mgmt + vmware65, centos7 mgmt + kvmcentos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
blueorangutan
commented
Jun 21, 2021
Trillian test result (tid-1020)
|
blueorangutan
commented
Jun 21, 2021
Trillian test result (tid-1019)
|
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
| ProvisioningType provisioningType, boolean localStorageRequired, boolean offerHA, String tags) { | ||
| tags = cleanupTags(tags); | ||
| DiskOfferingVO diskOfferingVO = new DiskOfferingVO(name, displayText, provisioningType, false, tags, false, false, false, true); | ||
| diskOfferingVO.setUniqueName("Cloud.Com-" + name); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
is this prefix "Cloud.Com-" required or offerings ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Here we are splitting the service offering and disk offering, so using the same name for both offerings.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Post upgrade, the existing service offerings and related disk offerings have the same name. While creating a new service offering, this prefix may not be required. what do you think?
blueorangutan
commented
Jun 21, 2021
Trillian test result (tid-1021)
|
GabrielBrascher
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@harikrishna-patnala can you please provide more details on this PR goal?
The PR's description does not help at all:
Description
This PR...
Types of changes
PS: I understand that this PR is a Draft. If you plan to enhance the PR description before making it ready-to-review please ignore my comment.
DaanHoogland
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
looks promising @harikrishna-patnala , thanks for picking this up.
You know I'm going to ask you to factor out the bits that you touched when done, right ? ;)
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
1bccb83 to
c16321fCompareharikrishna-patnala
commented
Jan 25, 2022
@blueorangutan package |
blueorangutan
commented
Jan 25, 2022
@harikrishna-patnala a Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. I'll keep you posted as I make progress. |
blueorangutan
commented
Jan 25, 2022
Packaging result: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 2294 |
harikrishna-patnala
commented
Jan 26, 2022
@blueorangutan test |
blueorangutan
commented
Jan 26, 2022
@harikrishna-patnala a Trillian-Jenkins test job (centos7 mgmt + kvm-centos7) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
blueorangutan
commented
Jan 27, 2022
Trillian test result (tid-3016)
|
borisstoyanov
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@harikrishna-patnala does this requires any additional testing after fixing the merge conflicts?
harikrishna-patnala
commented
Jan 27, 2022
@borisstoyanov those are very minor conflicts with resizeVolume UI form (only one line), which I've already verified after rebasing. I don't think additional testing is required. Thanks for asking. |
borisstoyanov
commented
Jan 27, 2022
ok great! |
yadvr
commented
Jan 27, 2022
Last round of smoketests LGTM |
Description
Currently, our compute offerings and disk offerings are tightly coupled with respect to many aspects. For example, if a compute offering is created, a corresponding disk offering entry is also created with the same ID as the reference. Also creating compute offering takes few disk-related parameters which anyway goes to the corresponding disk offering only. I think this design was initially made to address compute offering for the root volume created from a template. Also changing the offering of a volume is tightly coupled with storage tags and has to be done in different APIs either migrateVolume or resizeVolume. Changing of disk offering should be seamless and should consider new storage tags, new size and place the volume in appropriate state as defined in disk offering.
more details are mentioned here https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CLOUDSTACK/Compute+offering+and+disk+offering+refactoring
Types of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity
Feature/Enhancement Scale
Bug Severity
Screenshots (if appropriate):
How Has This Been Tested?