Display associated resource name on storage pools objects#9449
Conversation
Codecov ReportAttention: Patch coverage is
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #9449 +/- ##
===========================================
Coverage 15.54% 15.54%
Complexity 11976 11976
===========================================
Files 5494 5494
Lines 481056 481080 +24
Branches 61139 58636 -2503
===========================================
+ Hits 74770 74788 +18
- Misses 398024 398030 +6
Partials 8262 8262
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more. ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. |
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@nvazquez 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. |
|
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 10473 |
DaanHoogland
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
clgtm and I like the functionality. It does seem like a backwards incompatible change. Should we make it optional (/me being nitpicking)?
|
@blueorangutan package |
|
@rohityadavcloud 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. |
|
Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 10945 |
|
@blueorangutan test |
|
@rohityadavcloud a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests |
|
[SF] Trillian test result (tid-11336)
|


Description
This PR adds the resource name for templates, volumes and snapshots on the
listStoragePoolObjectsAPI response and displays them UI under the Associated Resource column on the Storage Pool Browser sectionTypes of changes
Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity
Feature/Enhancement Scale
Bug Severity
Screenshots (if appropriate):
Before the fix:

After the fix:

How Has This Been Tested?
Tested for Primary and Secondary Storage pools
How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?