CloudNetwork, NetworkPort and SecurityGroup belong to a ResourceGroup #19343
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
miha-plesko
approved these changes
Sep 30, 2019
|
@mancabizjak do you need this PR to be merged first ? if so then mark this PR in title WIP :
EDIT: anyway thanks for the PRs :) |
mancabizjak
changed the title
|
@lpichler that's right. Done and thanks for the heads up, appreciated! |
agrare
changed the title
agrare
reviewed
Sep 30, 2019
With this commit we model a `belongs_to` relationship to a ResourceGroup for CloudNetwork, NetworkPort and SecurityGroup models. A ResourceGroup now has a `has_many` relationship to these network entities. This mirrors the existing relationship between ResourceGroup and VMs. When a resource group is deleted, references to the associated resources are nullified. Signed-off-by: Manca Bizjak <manca.bizjak@xlab.si>
mancabizjak
force-pushed
the
additional-resource-group-relationships
branch
from
03c9bd3
to
e9e72f7
Compare
|
Checked commit xlab-si@e9e72f7 with ruby 2.4.6, rubocop 0.69.0, haml-lint 0.20.0, and yamllint 1.10.0 |
agrare
approved these changes
Oct 1, 2019
|
Thanks @mancabizjak ! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
In this commit we model a
belongs_torelationship to aResourceGroupforCloudNetwork,NetworkPortandSecurityGroup. AResourceGroupnow has ahas_manyrelationship to these network entities. This mirrors the existing relationship between theResourceGroupand
Vms.Rationale
This change is relevant in the context of Azure and AzureStack providers.
It will allow us to intuitively infer related DB targets in the scope of targeted refresh for resource groups (an ongoing effort). Currently we can only do
resource_group.vms, but to retrieve networks, network ports and security groups witin a specific resource group, we would have to use.where(ems_ref LIKE <resource_group.name>), since resource group name is a part of every AzureStack resource'sems_ref.WIP
Links
@miq-bot add_label enhancement
@miq-bot assign @agrare