Minimum validation for multitenant formations #5199

omaraibrahim · 2024-03-13T13:24:57Z

Community Note

Please vote on this pull request by adding a 👍 reaction to the original pull request comment to help the community and maintainers prioritize this request
Please do not leave "+1" or other comments that do not add relevant new information or questions, they generate extra noise for pull request followers and do not help prioritize the request

Relates OR Closes #0000

Testing Done

Provisioning with Redis

Provisioning multitenant Redis with insufficient memory

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-13-two"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 1024
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

terraform plan
╷
│ Warning: Provider development overrides are in effect
│ 
│ The following provider development overrides are set in the CLI configuration:
│  - ibm-cloud/ibm in /Users/omar/.go/bin
│ 
│ The behavior may therefore not match any released version of the provider and applying changes may cause the state to become incompatible with published releases.
╵
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Reading...
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Read complete after 1s [id=eb922ba0717f47589ca26d202c5cc915]

Planning failed. Terraform encountered an error while generating this plan.

╷
│ Error: 1 error occurred:
│ 	* We were unable to complete your request: group.memory requires a minimum of 4096 megabytes. Try again with valid values or contact support if the issue persists.
│ 
│ 
│ 
│   with ibm_database.test_acc,
│   on main.tf line 5, in resource "ibm_database" "test_acc":
│    5: resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {

Provisioning multitenant Redis with below-ratio memory

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-13-two"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 5120
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
    cpu {
      allocation_count = 2
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

terraform plan
╷
│ Warning: Provider development overrides are in effect
│ 
│ The following provider development overrides are set in the CLI configuration:
│  - ibm-cloud/ibm in /Users/omar/.go/bin
│ 
│ The behavior may therefore not match any released version of the provider and applying changes may cause the state to become incompatible with published releases.
╵
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Reading...
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Read complete after 1s [id=eb922ba0717f47589ca26d202c5cc915]

Terraform used the selected providers to generate the following execution plan. Resource actions are indicated with the following symbols:
  + create

Terraform will perform the following actions:

  # ibm_database.test_acc will be created
  + resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
      + adminpassword           = (sensitive value)
      + adminuser               = (known after apply)
      + configuration_schema    = (known after apply)
      + connectionstrings       = (known after apply)
      + groups                  = (known after apply)
      + guid                    = (known after apply)
      + id                      = (known after apply)
      + location                = "us-south"
      + name                    = "min-compute-redis-03-13-two"
      + plan                    = "standard"
      + resource_controller_url = (known after apply)
      + resource_crn            = (known after apply)
      + resource_group_id       = "eb922ba0717f47589ca26d202c5cc915"
      + resource_group_name     = (known after apply)
      + resource_name           = (known after apply)
      + resource_status         = (known after apply)
      + service                 = "databases-for-redis"
      + service_endpoints       = "public"
      + status                  = (known after apply)
      + tags                    = [
          + "one:two",
        ]
      + version                 = (known after apply)

      + group {
          + group_id = "member"

          + cpu {
              + allocation_count = 2
            }

          + host_flavor {
              + id = "multitenant"
            }

          + memory {
              + allocation_mb = 5120
            }
        }

      + users {
          # At least one attribute in this block is (or was) sensitive,
          # so its contents will not be displayed.
        }
    }

Plan: 1 to add, 0 to change, 0 to destroy.

Provisioning multitenant Redis with exact-ratio memory

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-13-two"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 8192
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
    cpu {
      allocation_count = 2
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

terraform plan
╷
│ Warning: Provider development overrides are in effect
│ 
│ The following provider development overrides are set in the CLI configuration:
│  - ibm-cloud/ibm in /Users/omar/.go/bin
│ 
│ The behavior may therefore not match any released version of the provider and applying changes may cause the state to become incompatible with published releases.
╵
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Reading...
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Read complete after 1s [id=eb922ba0717f47589ca26d202c5cc915]

Terraform used the selected providers to generate the following execution plan. Resource actions are indicated with the following symbols:
  + create

Terraform will perform the following actions:

  # ibm_database.test_acc will be created
  + resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
      + adminpassword           = (sensitive value)
      + adminuser               = (known after apply)
      + configuration_schema    = (known after apply)
      + connectionstrings       = (known after apply)
      + groups                  = (known after apply)
      + guid                    = (known after apply)
      + id                      = (known after apply)
      + location                = "us-south"
      + name                    = "min-compute-redis-03-13-two"
      + plan                    = "standard"
      + resource_controller_url = (known after apply)
      + resource_crn            = (known after apply)
      + resource_group_id       = "eb922ba0717f47589ca26d202c5cc915"
      + resource_group_name     = (known after apply)
      + resource_name           = (known after apply)
      + resource_status         = (known after apply)
      + service                 = "databases-for-redis"
      + service_endpoints       = "public"
      + status                  = (known after apply)
      + tags                    = [
          + "one:two",
        ]
      + version                 = (known after apply)

      + group {
          + group_id = "member"

          + cpu {
              + allocation_count = 2
            }

          + host_flavor {
              + id = "multitenant"
            }

          + memory {
              + allocation_mb = 8192
            }
        }

      + users {
          # At least one attribute in this block is (or was) sensitive,
          # so its contents will not be displayed.
        }
    }

Plan: 1 to add, 0 to change, 0 to destroy.

Provisioning multitenant Redis with Invalid Ratio

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-13-two"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 8704
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
    cpu {
      allocation_count = 1
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

terraform plan
╷
│ Warning: Provider development overrides are in effect
│ 
│ The following provider development overrides are set in the CLI configuration:
│  - ibm-cloud/ibm in /Users/omar/.go/bin
│ 
│ The behavior may therefore not match any released version of the provider and applying changes may cause the state to become incompatible with published releases.
╵
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Reading...
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Read complete after 1s [id=eb922ba0717f47589ca26d202c5cc915]

Planning failed. Terraform encountered an error while generating this plan.

╷
│ Error: 1 error occurred:
│ 	* The current cpu alloaction of 1 is not valid for your current configuration.
│ 
│ 
│ 
│   with ibm_database.test_acc,
│   on main.tf line 5, in resource "ibm_database" "test_acc":
│    5: resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
│

Provisioning with RabbitMQ

Provisioning multitenant RabbitMQ with insufficient memory

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-rabbitmq-03-13-two"
  service           = "messages-for-rabbitmq"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 1024
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

terraform plan
╷
│ Warning: Provider development overrides are in effect
│ 
│ The following provider development overrides are set in the CLI configuration:
│  - ibm-cloud/ibm in /Users/omar/.go/bin
│ 
│ The behavior may therefore not match any released version of the provider and applying changes may cause the state to become incompatible with published releases.
╵
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Reading...
data.ibm_resource_group.group: Read complete after 2s [id=eb922ba0717f47589ca26d202c5cc915]

Planning failed. Terraform encountered an error while generating this plan.

╷
│ Error: 1 error occurred:
│ 	* member group memory must be >= 8192 and <= 114688 in increments of 128
│ 
│ 
│ 
│   with ibm_database.test_acc,
│   on main.tf line 5, in resource "ibm_database" "test_acc":
│    5: resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
│

Scaling

Scaling non-multitenant to multitenant

Initial Non-Multitenant Formation

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-22-four"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 1024
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

Convert to Multitenant Formation with Invalid CPU Ratio

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-22-four"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 1024
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
    cpu {
      allocation_count = 1
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

Result

Planning failed. Terraform encountered an error while generating this plan.

╷
│ Error: 1 error occurred:
│ 	* The current cpu alloaction of 1 is not valid for your current configuration.
│ 
│ 
│ 
│   with ibm_database.test_acc,
│   on main.tf line 5, in resource "ibm_database" "test_acc":
│    5: resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
│

Convert to Multitenant Formation

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-22-four"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 1024
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

Result

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-22-four"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 1024
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

Scale Multitenant Formation Below Acceptable Memory

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-22-four"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 2048
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

Result

Planning failed. Terraform encountered an error while generating this plan.

╷
│ Error: 1 error occurred:
│ 	* member group memory must be >= 4096 and <= 114688 in increments of 128
│ 
│ 
│ 
│   with ibm_database.test_acc,
│   on main.tf line 5, in resource "ibm_database" "test_acc":
│    5: resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {

Scale Multitenant Formation With Acceptable Memory

data "ibm_resource_group" "group" {
  name = "default"
}

resource "ibm_database" "test_acc" {
  resource_group_id = data.ibm_resource_group.group.id
  name              = "min-compute-redis-03-22-four"
  service           = "databases-for-redis"
  plan              = "standard"
  location          = "us-south"
  adminpassword     = "password123456789"
  group {
    group_id = "member"
    memory {
      allocation_mb = 4096
    }
    host_flavor {
      id = "multitenant"
    }
  }
  tags              = ["one:two"]
  users {
    name     = "user123"
    password = "password123456789"
  }
}

Result

Apply complete! Resources: 0 added, 1 changed, 0 destroyed.

Acceptance Test

$ make testacc TEST=./ibm/service/database TESTARGS='-run=TestAccIBMDatabaseInstance_Redis_Basic'
--- PASS: TestAccIBMDatabaseInstance_Redis_Basic (824.23s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	825.700s
...

--- PASS: TestAccIBMDatabaseInstanceMongodbBasic (1304.27s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	1305.719s

--- PASS: TestAccIBMDatabaseInstance_Rabbitmq_Basic (1522.74s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	1524.222s

--- PASS: TestAccIBMDatabaseInstance_Elasticsearch_Basic (953.96s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	956.385s

--- PASS: TestAccIBMDatabaseInstance_ElasticsearchPlatinum_Basic (1658.71s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	1659.985s

--- PASS: TestAccIBMDatabaseInstance_Etcd_Basic (2848.54s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	2849.976s

--- PASS: TestAccIBMMysqlDatabaseInstanceBasic (838.18s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	839.679s

--- PASS: TestAccIBMCassandraDatabaseInstanceBasic (2222.69s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	2223.982s

--- PASS: TestAccIBMMongoDBEnterpriseDatabaseInstanceBasic (6331.87s)
PASS
ok  	github.com/IBM-Cloud/terraform-provider-ibm/ibm/service/database	6333.160s

…t information is not returned

bpeicher · 2024-03-13T13:32:01Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

@@ -2837,6 +2875,30 @@ func validateGroupHostFlavor(groupId string, resourceName string, group *Group)
 	return nil
 }

+func validateMultitenantMemoryCpu(groupId string, resourceName string, resourceDefaults *Group, group *Group) error {


Not sure what Go conventions are (just learning), but you might be able to put guard clauses in here to simplify the rest of your code. Like in the first line of this method:

if group.CPU != nil { return nil }

bpeicher · 2024-03-13T13:41:31Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

+		return fmt.Errorf("We were unable to complete your request: group.memory requires a minimum of %d megabytes. Try again with valid values or contact support if the issue persists.", resourceDefaults.Memory.Minimum)
+	}
+
+	if group.CPU != nil && group.Memory.Allocation < cpuEnforcementRatioCeiling*resourceDefaults.Members.Minimum && group.Memory.Allocation > group.CPU.Allocation*resourceDefaults.Memory.CPUEnforcementRatioMb {


cpuEnforcementRatioCeiling*resourceDefaults.Members.Minimum will work for provisioning, but a customer might have horizontally scaled, so we'd need you use cpuEnforcementRatioCeiling*resourceDefaults.Members.allocationCount, right?

@bpeicher yup you're correct! Thank you for catching that!

…multitenant to multitenant

obai-1 · 2024-03-18T21:51:05Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

+	// TODO: Replace this with resourceDefaults.Memory.CPUEnforcementRatioCeiling when it is fixed
+	cpuEnforcementRatioCeiling := 16384


When will this fix go in? Will that be before merging this PR?

@obai-1 This fix won't go in until the next release cut and deployment, so we're looking at around May.

This PR will be merged sometime thing week. So that's why we gotta hard code the cpuEnforcementRatioCeiling for now.

obai-1 · 2024-03-18T21:53:09Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

@@ -2837,6 +2870,39 @@ func validateGroupHostFlavor(groupId string, resourceName string, group *Group)
 	return nil
 }

+func validateMultitenantMemoryCpu(groupId string, resourceName string, resourceDefaults *Group, group *Group) error {


Do you need resourceName parameter here?

Nope! Thank you for catching that 😄

obai-1 · 2024-03-18T21:55:31Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

+	// This means the CPUEnforcementRatioMb was not sent, which means we are dealing with a non-multitenant going to a multitenat
+	if cpuEnforcmentRationMb == 0 {
+		cpuEnforcmentRationMb = 8192
+	}


if cpuEnforcmentRationMb is coming from resourceDefaults is this logic required here?

@obai-1 There is an edge case, when a user is has an existing databases and is going from non-multitenant to multitenant. In that case, we use the deployments/:id/groups API endpoint to get the database current configuration.

However, the deployments/:id/groups does not have the host_flavor query param. In other words, we do not get the cpuEnforcementRatioCeiling or the cpuEnforcementRatioMb.

So we have one of 2 options:

Call the deployables/{type}/group. Process the result, extract the ratios from it, and pass those into the function as well. This is a large amount of code that will have to be removed regardless as the enforcement ratios and query parameter are going to go away soonish, per the following "when the old hosting model goes away, so do these query string parameters".

Account for the edge case by hard-coding the cpuEnforcementRatio in the event the API didn't return it.

as the enforcement ratios and query parameter are going to go away soonish

Hmm.. unless I am missing something, they are not going away anytime soon..

Also hardcoding these numbers here is not safe. Those numbers could change down the line, and could also be db specific. Remember once we release it out to the wild, it is hard to take it back :)

…n all the different scenarios

obai-1 · 2024-03-21T18:46:16Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

+		return nil
+	}
+
+	if group.CPU != nil && group.CPU.Allocation > 2 {


should be something like group.CPU.Allocation >= EnforcementRatioCeiling/EnforcementRatio

obai-1 · 2024-03-21T18:56:46Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

+		return nil
+	}
+
+	if group.CPU != nil && group.Memory.Allocation*resourceDefaults.Members.Allocation < cpuEnforcementRatioCeilingTemp*resourceDefaults.Members.Allocation && group.Memory.Allocation*resourceDefaults.Members.Allocation > group.CPU.Allocation*cpuEnforcementRatioMb {


Is this validation useful, since you are not going to have any fractional values in group.CPU?

obai-1 · 2024-03-25T16:52:24Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

+	defaultList, err := getDefaultScalingGroups(service, plan, "multitenant", meta)
+
+	if err != nil {
+		return 0, 0


It would be better to propagate the error upward from here, rather than returning 0, 0.

Something like return err, 0, 0

obai-1 · 2024-03-25T16:53:36Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

+	// Get default or current group scaling values
+	for _, group := range tfGroups {
+		if group == nil {
+			break


Would continue be better than break here?

obai-1 · 2024-03-25T16:54:42Z

ibm/service/database/resource_ibm_database.go

+	if group.CPU == nil {
+		return nil
+	}
+
+	if group.CPU.Allocation == 0 {
+		return nil
+	}


Nit: these can be combined with ||

* added minimum-validation logic * refactored minimum compute code * updated tests to pass with enforced minimums * used cloud-databases-go-sdk version 0.6.0 * added getCpuEnforcementRatios to get use the cpu enforcement ratios in all the different scenarios * editted validateMultitenant Function to match CLI and Provisioning-ui * made changes requested in latest PR review

omaraibrahim added 4 commits March 7, 2024 12:57

added minimum-validation logic

33e92e2

refactored minimum compute code

af4d90b

fixed validate function. fixed seg fault issue in event cpuenforcemen…

eaefaa4

…t information is not returned

added TODO comment

5f17ce6

omaraibrahim marked this pull request as ready for review March 13, 2024 13:26

bpeicher reviewed Mar 13, 2024

View reviewed changes

omaraibrahim added 5 commits March 13, 2024 14:26

removed dev-yp-03 and made some adjustments based on PR review

b77d367

removed print statement

3c7242c

fixed some math and fixed validateMultitenantMemoryCpu to handle non-…

ad697f8

…multitenant to multitenant

updated tests to pass with enforced minimums

bdd4434

added more test changes

4e40584

omaraibrahim changed the title ~~Minimum validation/1074~~ Minimum validation for multitenant formations Mar 15, 2024

obai-1 reviewed Mar 18, 2024

View reviewed changes

omaraibrahim added 3 commits March 19, 2024 07:47

fixed typo and removed resourceName

7416311

used cloud-databases-go-sdk version 0.6.0

47e715c

added getCpuEnforcementRatios to get use the cpu enforcement ratios i…

27b29cb

…n all the different scenarios

obai-1 reviewed Mar 21, 2024

View reviewed changes

editted validateMultitenant Function to match CLI and Provisioning-ui

d6453e6

obai-1 reviewed Mar 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

made changes requested in latest PR review

51e2338

obai-1 approved these changes Mar 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

obai-1 merged commit bba2529 into IBM-Cloud:master Mar 25, 2024
1 check passed

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Minimum validation for multitenant formations #5199

Minimum validation for multitenant formations #5199

omaraibrahim commented Mar 13, 2024 •

edited

bpeicher Mar 13, 2024

bpeicher Mar 13, 2024

omaraibrahim Mar 13, 2024

obai-1 Mar 18, 2024

omaraibrahim Mar 19, 2024

obai-1 Mar 18, 2024

omaraibrahim Mar 19, 2024

obai-1 Mar 18, 2024

omaraibrahim Mar 19, 2024

obai-1 Mar 19, 2024

obai-1 Mar 19, 2024

obai-1 Mar 21, 2024 •

edited

obai-1 Mar 21, 2024

obai-1 Mar 25, 2024

obai-1 Mar 25, 2024

obai-1 Mar 25, 2024

		// TODO: Replace this with resourceDefaults.Memory.CPUEnforcementRatioCeiling when it is fixed
		cpuEnforcementRatioCeiling := 16384

Minimum validation for multitenant formations #5199

Minimum validation for multitenant formations #5199

Conversation

omaraibrahim commented Mar 13, 2024 • edited

Community Note

Testing Done

Provisioning with Redis

Provisioning multitenant Redis with insufficient memory

Provisioning multitenant Redis with below-ratio memory

Provisioning multitenant Redis with exact-ratio memory

Provisioning multitenant Redis with Invalid Ratio

Provisioning with RabbitMQ

Provisioning multitenant RabbitMQ with insufficient memory

Scaling

Scaling non-multitenant to multitenant

Initial Non-Multitenant Formation

Convert to Multitenant Formation with Invalid CPU Ratio

Result

Convert to Multitenant Formation

Result

Scale Multitenant Formation Below Acceptable Memory

Result

Scale Multitenant Formation With Acceptable Memory

Result

Acceptance Test

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

obai-1 Mar 21, 2024 • edited

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

omaraibrahim commented Mar 13, 2024 •

edited

obai-1 Mar 21, 2024 •

edited