Skip to content

CSTACKEX-299: validates the inputs for capacity bytes in update storage pool to be positive. - #101

Open
sathvikaragi wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
bugfix/CSTACKEX-299
Open

sathvikaragi wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
bugfix/CSTACKEX-299

Conversation

@sathvikaragi

@sathvikaragi sathvikaragi commented Sep 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

…r now validates inputs for positive number

Description

validates the inputs for capacity bytes in update storage pool to be positive.
This PR...

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?

@sathvikaragi sathvikaragi changed the title CSTACKEX-299: In edit storage pool wizard the capacity bytes paramete… CSTACKEX-299: validates the inputs for capacity bytes in update storage pool to be positive. Sep 15, 2026
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔴 Test Coverage Grade: D — Marginal

Metric Value
Line coverage 24.69%
Branch coverage 18.83%

Grade Scale

Grade Line Coverage Meaning
🟢 A ≥ 80% Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴
🟡 B 60-79% Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉
🟠 C 40-59% Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬
🔴 D 20-39% Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖
⛔ F < 20% Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥

Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run

private Long capacityIops;

@Parameter(name = ApiConstants.CAPACITY_BYTES, type = CommandType.LONG, required = false, description = "Bytes CloudStack can provision from this storage pool")
@Parameter(name = ApiConstants.CAPACITY_BYTES, type = CommandType.LONG, required = false, description = "Bytes CloudStack can provision from this storage pool",validations={ApiArgValidator.PositiveNumber})

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lets validate the regression scope for this change since it is in common place

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

similar to the storage_pool capacity bytes, even volumes in DB have the size parameter as
size | bigint unsigned | NO | | NULL |
so it expects a positive number only and db update would fail if someone inputs a negative number.

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

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants