Skip to content

Allocated volume pool allocation improvements - #14275

Open
sureshanaparti wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:4.22from
shapeblue:allocated_volume_pool_allocation_improvements
Open

sureshanaparti wants to merge 1 commit into
apache:4.22from
shapeblue:allocated_volume_pool_allocation_improvements

Conversation

@sureshanaparti

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This PR allows Allocated volumes with a pool id to go through the pool allocation logic. It gives preference to the poolId already existing on the volume. If suitable, it will reuse the same pool, else will continue with the pool allocation logic.
The same thing has been implemented for the VM deployment logic - if the VM start operation fails with the root volume in Allocated state but assigned poolId, it will retry with the same poolId or go through pool allocation if needed.

Changes:

  • Allow recreate volume for Allocated volumess with pool id
  • Change pool allocation logic to prioritise exising pool
  • Fix VM deployment logic for allocated volume reuse

If a volume fails during encryption etc during the first attach flow, the pool id of the volume gets set but the volume state remains in Allocated state. The next re-attach fails as the current logic for pool allocator expects the poolId for the volume to be null.

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

  • 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?

- Allow recreate volume for Allocated volumess with pool id
- Change pool allocation logic to prioritise exising pool
- Fix VM deployment logic for allocated volume reuse
@sureshanaparti

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@blueorangutan package

@blueorangutan

Copy link
Copy Markdown

@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

codecov Bot commented Sep 30, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 50.00000% with 11 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 18.01%. Comparing base (2e63c60) to head (76d6d83).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
...stack/engine/orchestration/VolumeOrchestrator.java 52.94% 8 Missing ⚠️
...om/cloud/deploy/DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl.java 33.33% 0 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...ain/java/com/cloud/storage/StorageManagerImpl.java 50.00% 0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               4.22   #14275   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     18.00%   18.01%           
- Complexity    16219    16233   +14     
=========================================
  Files          5936     5936           
  Lines        535716   535729   +13     
  Branches      65596    65598    +2     
=========================================
+ Hits          96459    96509   +50     
+ Misses       428268   428225   -43     
- Partials      10989    10995    +6     
Flag Coverage Δ
uitests 4.02% <ø> (ø)
unittests 19.09% <50.00%> (+<0.01%) ⬆️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 19356

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
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.

2 participants