----------------------------------------------------------- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13736/#review25459 -----------------------------------------------------------
Gaurav, there's more occurrences of is_snapshot_on_nfs in the same suite and in two other snapshot related suites. Can you please fix those too? If it makes sense make this a utility method. I can see that we have to revisit this test when run with an object store for secondary storage. So it would be wise to generalize it at this point. - Prasanna Santhanam On Aug. 22, 2013, 1:03 p.m., Gaurav Aradhye wrote: > > ----------------------------------------------------------- > This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: > https://reviews.apache.org/r/13736/ > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > (Updated Aug. 22, 2013, 1:03 p.m.) > > > Review request for cloudstack and Prasanna Santhanam. > > > Repository: cloudstack-git > > > Description > ------- > > Resolved cloudstack: 4452 > Changes in function is_snapshot_on_nfs to check if the snapshot is present in > the secondary storage. > > Earlier it was trying to match the name of the snapshot present on the > storage with the UUID of the snapshot which is incorrect way. > There's apparently no relation between the snapshot name on the storage and > the UUID of the snapshot. > > Changed the function to check if the snapshotPath is valid and is indeed a > "File". > > Also removed the VM creation (virtual_machine_without_disk) step in > setupClass of class TestSnapshots. It is not used anywhere and was eating up > the running time of test case and resources. > > > Diffs > ----- > > test/integration/component/test_snapshots.py cc2e604 > > Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/13736/diff/ > > > Testing > ------- > > > Thanks, > > Gaurav Aradhye > >
