change: [DI-26319] - Updated logic to render filters based on dashboard id instead of service type #12637
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
…rd id instead of service type
nikhagra-akamai
requested review from
cliu-akamai
and removed request for
a team
nikhagra-akamai
requested review from
coliu-akamai and
mjac0bs
and removed request for
a team
venkymano-akamai
approved these changes
Aug 6, 2025
jaalah-akamai
approved these changes
Aug 6, 2025
| > | ||
| {showAppliedFilters && ( | ||
| <CloudPulseAppliedFilterRenderer | ||
| dashboardId={dashboard.id} |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
question(non-blocking): Is it not confusing that we have both a dashboard.id and dashboardId? How do we know which to pass into CloudPulseAppliedFilterRenderer?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
both are same. If you see here CloudPulseDashboardWithFilters, we are fetching dashboard object for that dashboardId, so at the end both ids will be same only
coliu-akamai
approved these changes
Aug 6, 2025
|
|
||
| export const FILTER_CONFIG: Readonly< | ||
| Map<string, CloudPulseServiceTypeFilterMap> | ||
| Map<number, CloudPulseServiceTypeFilterMap> |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
suggestion (optional, nonblocking): for more type safety, perhaps we could do a union type like type FilterConfigId = 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 and then use it here
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this. value of Id is coming from API response and based on that filter will be rendered, that's why kept as number to have a fallback logic
Collaborator
Cloud Manager UI test results🔺 3 failing tests on test run #9 ↗︎
Details
TroubleshootingUse this command to re-run the failing tests: pnpm cy:run -s "cypress/e2e/core/notificationsAndEvents/qemu-reboot-upgrade-notice.spec.ts,cypress/e2e/core/account/restricted-user-details-pages.spec.ts,cypress/e2e/core/linodes/linode-storage.spec.ts" |
|||||||||||||||||||||||
nikhagra-akamai
added
Approved
abailly-akamai
pushed a commit
to abailly-akamai/manager
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 7, 2025
…rd id instead of service type (linode#12637) * change: [DI-26319] - Updated logic to render filters based on dashboard id instead of service type * Removed unused code * change: [DI-26319] - Updated mock data * change: [DI-26319] - Updated dashboard id for firewall and nodebalancer * change: [DI-26319] - Updated logic to render filter * upcoming: [DI-26319] - Updated mock data * change: [DI-26319] - Fixed failing test cases * added changeset
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
5 participants
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.
Description 📝
Dashboard filters now will be rendered based on dashboard id instead of service type
Changes 🔄
List any change(s) relevant to the reviewer.
Scope 🚢
Upon production release, changes in this PR will be visible to:
Target release date 🗓️
26th August
Preview 📷
Note
No difference in the UI after this change.
How to test 🧪
Author Checklists
As an Author, to speed up the review process, I considered 🤔
👀 Doing a self review
❔ Our contribution guidelines
🤏 Splitting feature into small PRs
➕ Adding a changeset
🧪 Providing/improving test coverage
🔐 Removing all sensitive information from the code and PR description
🚩 Using a feature flag to protect the release
👣 Providing comprehensive reproduction steps
📑 Providing or updating our documentation
🕛 Scheduling a pair reviewing session
📱 Providing mobile support
♿ Providing accessibility support
As an Author, before moving this PR from Draft to Open, I confirmed ✅