Skip to content

Conversation

@Pearl1594
Copy link
Contributor

@Pearl1594 Pearl1594 commented Sep 11, 2025

Description

This PR addresses the issue that filtering vNets with vpcID and siteID doesn't work as expected with the Netris API, thus leading it to fetch incorrect list of vNets. Restricting the filter to just VPC ID.

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

Bug Severity

  • BLOCKER
  • Critical
  • Major
  • Minor
  • Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

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

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Sep 11, 2025

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 6 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 17.39%. Comparing base (b46e29d) to head (3fb8a87).
⚠️ Report is 11 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...apache/cloudstack/service/NetrisApiClientImpl.java 0.00% 6 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main   #11617   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     17.39%   17.39%           
- Complexity    15279    15282    +3     
=========================================
  Files          5888     5888           
  Lines        526092   526088    -4     
  Branches      64223    64223           
=========================================
  Hits          91527    91527           
+ Misses       424233   424229    -4     
  Partials      10332    10332           
Flag Coverage Δ
uitests 3.62% <ø> (ø)
unittests 18.44% <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.

@Pearl1594
Copy link
Contributor Author

@blueorangutan package

@blueorangutan
Copy link

@Pearl1594 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.

@sonarqubecloud
Copy link

Copy link
Member

@weizhouapache weizhouapache left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

code lgtm

@blueorangutan
Copy link

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 14963

@DaanHoogland
Copy link
Contributor

@blueorangutan test

@blueorangutan
Copy link

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

@blueorangutan
Copy link

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-14333)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 54621 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr11617-t14333-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 147 look OK, 0 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test Result Time (s) Test File

@nvazquez
Copy link
Contributor

Merging based on approvals and test results

@nvazquez nvazquez merged commit 96ccd7e into main Sep 16, 2025
48 of 49 checks passed
@nvazquez nvazquez deleted the netris-filter-netris-vnets branch September 16, 2025 12:13
@drynoa
Copy link

drynoa commented Nov 11, 2025

@Pearl1594 Did this lead to issues with update/remove actions on Guest Networks in CloudStack due to the filter or did it just receive too many vNets in the request to go through than needed? Just curious as we're encountering issues in the same bit of code which seems closely related (but has to do with parsing).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants