PowerFlex on demand disable config key

mprokopchuk commented 2 months ago

Description

Added configuration key powerflex.connect.on.demand. When set to false, then logic in ScaleIO plugin to disconnect Host from the storage pool when there are no volumes and connect Host to storage pool when new volume created will not be used (https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/pull/9268).

The reason for that - plugin's connect/disconnect logic stops and starts scini service. If Host connected to multiple storage pools, then it won't be disconnected from unused pools, there will be all or none. Also we observed scini stability issue - after multiple start/stop it is not always starting back properly. For now we would like to have flag to enable/disable this feature.

In addition, as part of the PR, added SQL to update resource_reservation table with two new columns. Right now we are copy-pasting that SQL within RPMs to be executed during deployment, but having migration script would be better issue.

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)
[X] Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
[ ] Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

[ ] Major
[X] Minor

Bug Severity

[ ] BLOCKER
[ ] Critical
[X] Major
[ ] Minor
[ ] Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

Tested manually.

mprokopchuk commented 2 months ago

@blueorangutan test

sureshanaparti commented 2 months ago

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan commented 2 months ago

@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[bot] commented 2 months ago

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 14.28571% with 18 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 15.81%. Comparing base (501d8c1) to head (468dbcb). Report is 39 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...orage/datastore/manager/ScaleIOSDCManagerImpl.java	14.28%	17 Missing and 1 partial :warning:

Additional details and impacted files

```diff @@ Coverage Diff @@ ## main #9664 +/- ## ============================================ + Coverage 15.77% 15.81% +0.03% - Complexity 12538 12555 +17 ============================================ Files 5621 5629 +8 Lines 491556 492061 +505 Branches 60227 60644 +417 ============================================ + Hits 77562 77836 +274 - Misses 405537 405903 +366 + Partials 8457 8322 -135 ``` | [Flag](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/cloudstack/pull/9664/flags?src=pr&el=flags&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | Coverage Δ | | |---|---|---| | [uitests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/cloudstack/pull/9664/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `4.48% <ø> (+0.43%)` | :arrow_up: | | [unittests](https://app.codecov.io/gh/apache/cloudstack/pull/9664/flags?src=pr&el=flag&utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache) | `16.61% <14.28%> (+0.01%)` | :arrow_up: | Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. [Click here](https://docs.codecov.io/docs/carryforward-flags?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=github&utm_content=comment&utm_campaign=pr+comments&utm_term=apache#carryforward-flags-in-the-pull-request-comment) to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

sureshanaparti commented 2 months ago

Hi @mprokopchuk No SQL changes in the PR as mention in the description, Please check/update the PR changes or description accordingly. Thanks.

blueorangutan commented 2 months ago

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 11067

sureshanaparti commented 2 months ago

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan commented 2 months ago

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

blueorangutan commented 2 months ago

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-11435) Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8 Total time taken: 52922 seconds Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr9664-t11435-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

rohityadavcloud commented 2 months ago

cc @JoaoJandre we've asked our @borisstoyanov to help with QA.

JoaoJandre commented 2 months ago

@mprokopchuk the description states that there is a SQL change, but I don't see any SQL changes, will it be added? If not, could you update the description?

borisstoyanov commented 2 months ago

@mprokopchuk the description states that there is a SQL change, but I don't see any SQL changes, will it be added? If not, could you update the description?

Looks like a copy/paste error, I believe this part can be removed from the PR description.

sureshanaparti commented 2 months ago

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan commented 2 months ago

@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.

blueorangutan commented 2 months ago

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✔️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 11157

DaanHoogland commented 1 month ago

@sureshanaparti , do we need to run regression tests for other hypervisors than KVM?

sureshanaparti commented 1 month ago

@sureshanaparti , do we need to run regression tests for other hypervisors than KVM?

@DaanHoogland KVM should be fine.

DaanHoogland commented 1 month ago

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan commented 1 month ago

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

blueorangutan commented 1 month ago

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-11545)

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
ContextSuite context=TestISOUsage>:setup	`Error`	0.00	test_usage.py
test_03_secured_to_nonsecured_vm_migration	`Error`	395.64	test_vm_life_cycle.py

apache / cloudstack