-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/16733/#review31361
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!


Committed to 4.3 and master

- Girish Shilamkar


On Jan. 8, 2014, 11:39 a.m., Gaurav Aradhye wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/16733/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 8, 2014, 11:39 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for cloudstack and Girish Shilamkar.
> 
> 
> Bugs: CLOUDSTACK-5630
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-5630
> 
> 
> Repository: cloudstack-git
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Fixes:
> [1]
> test_03_snapshots_per_account FAILED  Check Snapshot state is Running or not 
> test_03_snapshots_per_domain  FAILED  Check Snapshot state is Running or not
> 
> Above test cases failed because the snapshot state was Allocated in this 
> case, and the state "Allocated" was not added in the assertion list.
> Corrected the assertion messages.
> 
> [2]
> test_02_accountSnapshotClean  FAILED  Snapshot was not found on NFS 
> test_04_snapshot_limit        FAILED  False is not True 
> test_01_createVM_snapshotTemplate     FAILED  False is not True 
> test_02_snapshot_data_disk    FAILED  False is not True
> 
> Above test cases failed because the code would check whether the snapshot is 
> present or not in wrong storage pool.
> When there are multiple secondary storage allocated for a zone, we should get 
> the store_id of the snapshot and then get the respective image store and then 
> check on that store.
> This additional step was missing.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   test/integration/component/test_resource_limits.py b543e7b 
>   tools/marvin/marvin/integration/lib/utils.py 25ebe28 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/16733/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> Tested locally.
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gaurav Aradhye
> 
>

Reply via email to