Skip to content
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

Feedback when defining cloud providers #32

Closed
Iqqdd99 opened this issue Sep 23, 2024 · 3 comments
Closed

Feedback when defining cloud providers #32

Iqqdd99 opened this issue Sep 23, 2024 · 3 comments
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Iqqdd99
Copy link

Iqqdd99 commented Sep 23, 2024

When cloud providers are added to the platform they are just added to the Resources section but there is no feedback to show that they have been added correctly or if there are any errors.

@Iqqdd99
Copy link
Author

Iqqdd99 commented Sep 27, 2024

A similar situation exists regarding applications, the GUI does not provide meaningful feedback based on the actual state of the applications.

@vkefalas-exz vkefalas-exz added the enhancement New feature or request label Oct 8, 2024
@robert-sanfeliu
Copy link

robert-sanfeliu commented Oct 24, 2024

I suggest:

  • Remove the list of node candidates from the main resources page, as it is showing candidates from all cloud providers registered in proactive. Since a single proactive instance is shared among all the organizations/users using the GUI, this will show node candidates unrelated to the user/organization (Wrong list of nodeCandidates shown in resource management section #27)
    image

  • Move the "Eye" button inside the cloud resource edit form. This button has to issue a addCloud request to SAL, wait for the response of "/sal/cloud/async" endpoint to be False (or timeout to 2 minutes) and then issue a getNodeCanidates request to SAL with the following payload:

[
{"type":"NodeTypeRequirement","nodeTypes":["IAAS"],"jobIdForByon":"","jobIdForEDGE":""},
{"type":"AttributeRequirement","requirementClass":"cloud","requirementAttribute":"id","requirementOperator":"EQ","value":"ID_OF_THE_CLOUD_RESOURCE"},
{"type":"AttributeRequirement","requirementClass":"location","requirementAttribute":"name","requirementOperator":"IN","value":"SELECTED_REGIONS"},
{"type":"AttributeRequirement","requirementClass":"hardware","requirementAttribute":"name","requirementOperator":"IN","value":"INCLUDED_INSTANCE_TYPES"}
]

Where:

  • ID_OF_THE_CLOUD_PROVIDER has to be substituted
  • SELECTED_REGIONS has to be substituted with the coma separated list of the Regions selected by the user. The whole clause has to be removed if no region is selected
  • SELECTED_REGIONS has to be substituted with the coma separated list of the Regions selected by the user. The whole clause has to be removed if no region is selected
  • INCLUDED_INSTANCE_TYPES hast to be replaced with the coma separated list of included instance types selected by the user. If no instance type is selected, the whole clause has to be removed.

The results of this request have to be shown in tabular form

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants