-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 294
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
✨ Add ability to add new data disks to VM during clone process #3214
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Welcome @vr4manta! |
Hi @vr4manta. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
/ok-to-test |
/test help |
@chrischdi: The specified target(s) for
The following commands are available to trigger optional jobs:
Use
In response to this:
Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-vsphere-e2e-vcsim-govmomi-main |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
please ping once this is ready for review.
9c0f201
to
1636c16
Compare
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-vsphere-e2e-vcsim-govmomi-main |
@neolit123 |
cc @lubronzhan @neolit123 @rikatz , this one should be ready for review (xref CAPV office hours) :-) Thanks @vr4manta for driving this! |
/assign @neolit123 @lubronzhan |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
thanks for the PR @vr4manta
overall seems fine. i've added a few comments around the API and docs/code-comments here and there.
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
e3c9be0
to
78a0873
Compare
6649b60
to
f11b363
Compare
4403b59
to
84cddbd
Compare
@neolit123 @lubronzhan lots of updates are in. Ready for next review. Thanks! Also, e2e is in, but for some reason, it is not working against the e2e cluster in other PR. When I run these tests locally against my vcenter, it all seems to work. I cannot access the logs from the e2e run due to what looks like IP / VPN. Is someone able to check that and help me diagnose it? Thanks! |
test/e2e/multi-disk_test.go
Outdated
ToVersion string | ||
} | ||
|
||
var _ = Describe("Multi-Disk support", func() { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
var _ = Describe("Multi-Disk support", func() { | |
var _ = Describe("Ensure govmomi mode is able to add additional disks to VMs [vcsim]", func() { |
Can we run this with vcsim and properly name the test?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would assume it can also run with vsim. I'll verify that is working. I'll also update the name.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It seems that using finder against vcsim doesn't like finding the VMs for some reason. The test works fine against real vCenter, but getting a bad error when trying to work against vcsim. I'm still looking into it, but I may just avoid vcsim for now.
} | ||
|
||
// If we are here, we did not find a unit number. Return error. | ||
return errors.Errorf("unable to find available unit number") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
return errors.Errorf("unable to find available unit number") | |
return errors.New("all unit numbers are already in-use") |
Not sure if that's a good error message though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah, I would almost think the template image being already full before attempting to add an additional should never happen, but this is a good safety net in case something strange happens. I was almost leaning towards `no unit numbers are available for use", but if your suggestion makes sense to you, I am ok with it. I'll change this to the new text unless someone else has a better suggestion.
What this PR does / why we need it:
Add API changes that adds the ability to add new data disks to VMs during the cloning process. These new disks are not present in the vSphere VM Template.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in
fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):Fixes #3213