Create, Delete, Enable, Disable, Enter, Cancel maintenance of Primary StoragePool with ONTAP storage by sandeeplocharla · Pull Request #12563 · apache/cloudstack

sandeeplocharla · 2026-02-01T14:08:52Z

Create & Delete, Enable & Disable, Enter & Cancel maintenance of Primary StoragePool with ONTAP storage

Co-authored-by: Rajiv Jain rajiv1@netapp.com
Co-authored-by: Piyush Srivastava piyush5@netapp.com
Co-authored-by: Surya Gupta suryag@netapp.com

Description

NetApp ONTAP Storage Plugin

Introduction

This document describes in brief the design and implementation of the NetApp ONTAP storage plugin for Apache CloudStack. The plugin enables CloudStack to use NetApp ONTAP as a primary storage provider.

ONTAP Terminology

Term	Description
SVM	Storage Virtual Machine - a logical storage container that provides data access to clients
FlexVolume	A logical volume that can grow or shrink within an aggregate
Aggregate	A collection of physical disks that provides storage for volumes
LIF	Logical Interface - a network interface for client access (Management LIF for admin, Data LIF for storage traffic)
iGroup	Initiator Group - a collection of host initiator IQNs used for iSCSI access control
Export Policy	A set of rules that define NFS client access to volumes

Scope

Current Implementation

The following operations are currently implemented:

Operation	Description
Create Primary Storage Pool	Creates a FlexVolume on ONTAP and registers it as a primary storage pool in CloudStack
Delete Primary Storage Pool	Removes the storage pool from CloudStack and deletes the FlexVolume from ONTAP
Attach Cluster/Zone	Creates access groups (iGroups for iSCSI, export policies for NFS) and connects hosts
Enable/Disable Storage Pool	Enables or disables the storage pool for use
Enter/Cancel Maintenance	Places storage pool in maintenance mode or brings it back online

Supported Configurations

Configuration	Supported Values
Hypervisor	KVM
ONTAP Platform	Unified
Protocols	NFS 3.0, iSCSI
Storage Pool Scope	Cluster, Zone

Storage Pool Lifecycle

Create Storage Pool

Validate input parameters (SVM, protocol, credentials)
Connect to ONTAP and verify SVM state and protocol enablement
Create FlexVolume on ONTAP
Register storage pool in CloudStack

Attach to Cluster/Zone

Identify eligible hosts in the scope
Create access group (iGroup or export policy)
Connect each host to the storage pool

Delete Storage Pool

Delete access groups from ONTAP
Delete FlexVolume from ONTAP
Remove storage pool from CloudStack

Configuration Parameters

Parameters are passed via URL in semicolon-separated key=value format:

Parameter	Description
`username`	ONTAP admin username
`password`	ONTAP admin password
`managementLIF`	ONTAP cluster management IP
`svmName`	Storage Virtual Machine name
`protocol`	`NFS3` or `ISCSI`

There are few files under feign folder which aren't currently being consumed by the workflows being proposed for review. But, they are definitely required for upcoming workflows.

Types of changes

Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
Build/CI
Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Major
Minor

Bug Severity

How Has This Been Tested?

Management Server Operations:
- Added a new zone using the Management server UI.
- Verified functionality of core and advanced zone types.
Primary Storage Pool Operations:
- Create: Verified creation of primary storage pool.
- Delete: Verified deletion of primary storage pool.
- Enable/Disable: Tested enabling and disabling the storage pool.
- Maintenance Mode: Verified entering and exiting maintenance mode.
- Cancel Maintenance: Ensured maintenance cancellation works.

Testing Environment:

The test setup was conducted on an Ubuntu VM with the following components installed and configured:
- Management server
- Cloudstack agent and KVM
- NFS server
- iSCSI initiator
Testing has been done currently with a single host.
Following are snapshots from the test done:
NFS3 Primary Storage Pool - Create

NFS3 type ONTAP Volume created

Export Policy created on ONTAP

Disabled Primary Storage Pool - NFS3

Re-Enabled Primary Storage Pool - NFS3

Enter maintenance mode - NFS3

Cancel maintenance mode - NFS3

Delete Primary StoragePool - NFS3

ONTAP Volume deleted

ONTAP ExportPolicy deleted

iSCSI Primary Storage Pool - Delete

iSCSI type ONTAP Volume created

iGroup created

Disabled Primary Storage Pool - iSCSI

Re-Enabled Primary Storage Pool - iSCSI

Enter maintenance mode - iSCSI

Cancel maintenance mode - iSCSI

Delete Primary StoragePool - iSCSI

ONTAP iGroup deleted

ONTAP Volume deleted

codecov · 2026-02-01T15:41:03Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 5.93525% with 2615 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 17.96%. Comparing base (18075ae) to head (163ced4).
⚠️ Report is 1 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...he/cloudstack/storage/service/StorageStrategy.java	0.35%	279 Missing ⚠️
...rage/lifecycle/OntapPrimaryDatastoreLifecycle.java	31.62%	210 Missing and 17 partials ⚠️
...cloudstack/storage/service/UnifiedNASStrategy.java	0.00%	200 Missing ⚠️
...cloudstack/storage/service/UnifiedSANStrategy.java	0.00%	186 Missing ⚠️
...org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/Lun.java	0.00%	178 Missing ⚠️
.../apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/Igroup.java	0.00%	155 Missing ⚠️
...pache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/FileInfo.java	0.00%	152 Missing ⚠️
...che/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/ExportRule.java	0.00%	96 Missing ⚠️
...e/cloudstack/storage/feign/FeignConfiguration.java	0.00%	89 Missing ⚠️
...cloudstack/storage/listener/OntapHostListener.java	0.00%	88 Missing ⚠️
... and 32 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #12563      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     18.01%   17.96%   -0.06%     
- Complexity    16459    16484      +25     
============================================
  Files          5968     6011      +43     
  Lines        537218   539998    +2780     
  Branches      65977    66182     +205     
============================================
+ Hits          96801    96994     +193     
- Misses       429498   432067    +2569     
- Partials      10919    10937      +18

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	`3.53% <ø> (ø)`
unittests	`19.11% <5.93%> (-0.07%)`	⬇️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

kiranchavala · 2026-02-03T05:09:10Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2026-02-03T05:10:04Z

@kiranchavala a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with no SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2026-02-03T05:39:31Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✖️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 16683

kiranchavala · 2026-02-03T06:16:05Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2026-02-03T06:18:03Z

@kiranchavala a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

DaanHoogland · 2026-02-03T08:33:27Z

Hey @sandeeplocharla et al,

Great work, some issues came up in the github actions. Can you first look at the license check and the pre-commit actions?
thanks for the extensive test description as well. We cannot guarantee 3rd party testing as I hope you understand. I’ll be sure to review your work and thanks again.

sandeeplocharla · 2026-02-03T09:05:41Z

Hi @DaanHoogland
Thank you! I'm trying to understand the errors. For us to have more clarity, could you please help us understand in brief on what is being checked in the tests that failed?

rajiv-jain-netapp · 2026-02-03T09:07:45Z

Hey @sandeeplocharla et al,

Great work, some issues came up in the github actions. Can you first look at the license check and the pre-commit actions? thanks for the extensive test description as well. We cannot guarantee 3rd party testing as I hope you understand. I’ll be sure to review your work and thanks again.

Thank you, @DaanHoogland. We look forward to receiving your review comments and will address them as soon as possible.

sandeeplocharla · 2026-02-03T13:48:45Z

Hi, the project level Code coverage seems to be failing, due to mutliple files that this code is indirectly touching, doesn't have coverage. What could be done in such a case?
Also, please help us with the smoke and component tests that are failing? I don't think we have made changes that are relevant to those tests.

DaanHoogland · 2026-02-03T15:17:37Z

Hi, the project level Code coverage seems to be failing, due to mutliple files that this code is indirectly touching, doesn't have coverage. What could be done in such a case? Also, please help us with the smoke and component tests that are failing? I don't think we have made changes that are relevant to those tests.

@sandeeplocharla , we have ambitions on coverage that we don’t meet historically. Please trty to meet them on your part of the code, more we cannot ask. As for the failing tests, these seem te be the same that are failing on main as well. If you can give us any hints on them that will be very much appreciated ;)

DaanHoogland · 2026-02-03T13:39:51Z

plugins/storage/volume/ontap/pom.xml

did you do license checks on the extra dependencies added in this file?
see https://apache.org/legal/resolved.html for explanation.

Will check the licenses and get back to you.

Hi @DaanHoogland , I've cross-checked the licenses of the dependencies added in our pom.xml. I had to remove one which wasn't conforming with ACF guidelines that you've shared.
Currently, all licenses in the ONTAP plugin are compliant with Apache CloudStack norms. All runtime dependencies use Apache License 2.0 (Category A). Test dependencies use MIT and EPL 2.0 licenses, which are also Category A compatible. No Category X licenses are present.

thanks so much @sandeeplocharla 👍

sandeeplocharla · 2026-02-03T16:30:09Z

Hi, the project level Code coverage seems to be failing, due to mutliple files that this code is indirectly touching, doesn't have coverage. What could be done in such a case? Also, please help us with the smoke and component tests that are failing? I don't think we have made changes that are relevant to those tests.

@sandeeplocharla , we have ambitions on coverage that we don’t meet historically. Please trty to meet them on your part of the code, more we cannot ask. As for the failing tests, these seem te be the same that are failing on main as well. If you can give us any hints on them that will be very much appreciated ;)

This PR does not have the benchmark coverage that we usually aim for within our team. But, we plan on having maximum code coverage possible with the upcoming PRs. As for this PR, there are around 5400 indirect files because of which the coverage dropped. I'm not sure, how we would able to handle them all.
Will try to see if there's anything that we could do in RCA for the failing tests, but, in the meanwhile, please let us know how we could proceed from here?

blueorangutan · 2026-02-03T22:11:26Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-15359)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 54505 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr12563-t15359-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 146 look OK, 4 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_provision_certificate	`Error`	121.48	test_certauthority_root.py
ContextSuite context=TestListIdsParams>:teardown	`Error`	1.11	test_list_ids_parameter.py
test_01_snapshot_root_disk	`Error`	5.22	test_snapshots.py
test_02_list_snapshots_with_removed_data_store	`Error`	45.47	test_snapshots.py
test_02_list_snapshots_with_removed_data_store	`Error`	45.48	test_snapshots.py
ContextSuite context=TestSnapshotStandaloneBackup>:teardown	`Error`	28.38	test_snapshots.py
test_01_snapshot_usage	`Error`	25.62	test_usage.py
test_01_vpn_usage	`Error`	1.07	test_usage.py

DaanHoogland · 2026-02-04T07:25:30Z

Will try to see if there's anything that we could do in RCA for the failing tests, but, in the meanwhile, please let us know how we could proceed from here?

this is good enough until we encounter tangible issues. Please continue with the comment outstanding now. review effort will have to be made and I (or we) will hopefully get to this soon. Please be prepared for some rebasing and conflict resolving over the coming weeks 🥺 … unfortunately I cannot promise when further review will happen, but this PR is on my list.

…ary StoragePool with ONTAP storage Co-authored-by: Rajiv Jain <Rajiv.Jain@netapp.com> Create & Delete, Enable & Disable, Enter & Cancel maintenance of Primary StoragePool with ONTAP storage Co-authored-by: Rajiv Jain<rajiv1@netapp.com> Edited readme file Fixed license check issue Removed dependency that's not conforming with ACF guidelines

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-10T09:16:47Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2026-03-10T09:18:05Z

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with no SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2026-03-10T10:23:47Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✖️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 17065

blueorangutan · 2026-03-10T14:46:15Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✖️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 17077

blueorangutan · 2026-03-16T16:42:05Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✖️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 17158

plugins/storage/volume/ontap/pom.xml

plugins/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/utils/Utility.java

plugins/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/utils/Constants.java

plugins/storage/volume/ontap/README.md

...torage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/service/StorageStrategy.java

...age/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/service/UnifiedNASStrategy.java

...olume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/provider/StorageProviderFactory.java

...ap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/lifecycle/OntapPrimaryDatastoreLifecycle.java

blueorangutan · 2026-03-17T10:38:50Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 17170

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-17T10:55:11Z

@sandeeplocharla , I don’t know why but the packaging failed over the PR name and it turns out it is the ‘&’, so I removed that from the PR title. Hope that doesn’t hurt anyones feeling or creates an administrative mess somewhere...

rajiv-jain-netapp · 2026-03-24T13:33:17Z

Hi @DaanHoogland, we are fine with the text correction for the PR. Can we please run the checks again and confirm that it resolves the issues? We are ready with the next set of changes to CloudStack volume workflows. We will prioritize another PR once this is merged.

…m/NetApp/cloudstack into netapp-ontap-primary-storage-pool

sandeeplocharla · 2026-03-27T01:56:10Z

Hi @DaanHoogland
Thankyou! for the review. I have addressed your review comments, please take a look at your convenience.

We have more features that we plan on raising PRs for. Unfortunately, they can't be clubbed as it would become a huge PR, making it difficult to review. So, We hope other reviewers could also review and help us in expediting this process.

DaanHoogland

clgtm, some suggestions but nothing blocking. I think with regression testing done this can be merged.

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-30T07:25:36Z

...ns/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/Cluster.java

+    @Override
+    public String toString() {
+        return "Cluster{" +
+                "name='" + name + '\'' +
+                ", uuid='" + uuid + '\'' +
+                ", version=" + version +
+                ", sanOptimized=" + sanOptimized +
+                ", disaggregated=" + disaggregated +
+                '}';
+    }


we tend to use ReflectionToStringBuilderUtils for toString methods ( no -1 on this)

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-30T07:25:58Z

...ns/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/Cluster.java

+    @Override
+    public String toString() {
+        return "Cluster{" +
+                "name='" + name + '\'' +
+                ", uuid='" + uuid + '\'' +
+                ", version=" + version +
+                ", sanOptimized=" + sanOptimized +
+                ", disaggregated=" + disaggregated +
+                '}';
+    }


ReflectionToStringBuilderUtils

...orage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/ExportPolicy.java

...storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/ExportRule.java

...s/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/FileInfo.java

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-30T07:32:16Z

plugins/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/Lun.java

+    @Override
+    public String toString() {
+        StringBuilder sb = new StringBuilder();
+        sb.append("class Lun {\n");
+        sb.append("    autoDelete: ").append(toIndentedString(autoDelete)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    propertyClass: ").append(toIndentedString(propertyClass)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    enabled: ").append(toIndentedString(enabled)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    lunMaps: ").append(toIndentedString(lunMaps)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    name: ").append(toIndentedString(name)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    osType: ").append(toIndentedString(osType)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    serialNumber: ").append(toIndentedString(serialNumber)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    space: ").append(toIndentedString(space)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    svm: ").append(toIndentedString(svm)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("    uuid: ").append(toIndentedString(uuid)).append("\n");
+        sb.append("}");
+        return sb.toString();
+    }


ReflectionToStringBuilderUtils

...ins/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/LunMap.java

...s/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/LunSpace.java

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-30T07:33:46Z

plugins/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/Nas.java

this class need not be printed?

...ns/storage/volume/ontap/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/storage/feign/model/Version.java

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-30T07:42:00Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2026-03-30T07:44:04Z

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with no SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

harikrishna-patnala · 2026-03-30T08:05:15Z

clgtm, some suggestions but nothing blocking. I think with regression testing done this can be merged.

Agreed @DaanHoogland. I see all of the code changes are in a separate plugin and there is a good test report in the description.

blueorangutan · 2026-03-30T08:28:25Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 17283

harikrishna-patnala

code LGTM

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-30T11:33:58Z

@blueorangutan test matrix

blueorangutan · 2026-03-30T11:36:04Z

@DaanHoogland a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins matrix job (EL8 mgmt + EL8 KVM, Ubuntu22 mgmt + Ubuntu22 KVM, EL8 mgmt + VMware 7.0u3, EL9 mgmt + XCP-ng 8.2 ) has been kicked to run smoke tests

blueorangutan · 2026-03-30T11:46:32Z

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-15772)

blueorangutan · 2026-03-30T11:47:59Z

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-15770)

sandeeplocharla · 2026-03-30T15:02:01Z

Thank you! For reviewing and approving the PR @DaanHoogland and @harikrishna-patnala
Will take a relook at the 'toString' methods. Will cross check its usecases in the code and if its needed will use ReflectionToStringBuilderUtils as suggested.

blueorangutan · 2026-03-31T02:33:47Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-15769)
Environment: kvm-ol8 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 50986 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr12563-t15769-kvm-ol8.zip
Smoke tests completed. 150 look OK, 1 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_09_arping_in_cpvm	`Failure`	5.20	test_diagnostics.py

blueorangutan · 2026-03-31T03:47:57Z

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-15771)
Environment: vmware-70u3 (x2), zone: Advanced Networking with Mgmt server ol8
Total time taken: 55857 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr12563-t15771-vmware-70u3.zip
Smoke tests completed. 147 look OK, 4 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_CRUD_operations_guest_OS_mapping	`Error`	1.32	test_guest_os.py
test_guest_OS_mapping_check_with_hypervisor	`Error`	2.42	test_guest_os.py
ContextSuite context=TestKubernetesCluster>:setup	`Error`	0.00	test_kubernetes_clusters.py
test_01_vpn_usage	`Error`	1.10	test_usage.py
test_08_migrate_vm	`Error`	31.52	test_vm_life_cycle.py

…methods for models

sandeeplocharla · 2026-03-31T06:04:28Z

Hi @DaanHoogland @harikrishna-patnala @sureshanaparti @weizhouapache
I have addressed the comments from yesterday too and raised a diff on retesting the workflows that would be supported with this PR. Please take a look and let us know if there's anything else needed to get this PR to closure?

DaanHoogland · 2026-03-31T08:24:34Z

@weizhouapache @winterhazel , it would be good if we have ontap support in 23. Can you guys have look, please?

boring-cyborg bot added component:build component:primary-storage component:storage labels Feb 1, 2026

sandeeplocharla force-pushed the netapp-ontap-primary-storage-pool branch 2 times, most recently from c495c7c to 20d4e97 Compare February 2, 2026 12:55

sandeeplocharla marked this pull request as ready for review February 2, 2026 14:05

sandeeplocharla force-pushed the netapp-ontap-primary-storage-pool branch from 20d4e97 to c98cf8c Compare February 2, 2026 14:12

DaanHoogland added this to the 4.23.0 milestone Feb 3, 2026

DaanHoogland added the 3rd-party:ontap label Feb 3, 2026

sandeeplocharla force-pushed the netapp-ontap-primary-storage-pool branch 2 times, most recently from 08b53f0 to b1792b4 Compare February 3, 2026 11:58

DaanHoogland self-requested a review February 3, 2026 13:41

DaanHoogland reviewed Feb 3, 2026

View reviewed changes

sandeeplocharla force-pushed the netapp-ontap-primary-storage-pool branch from b1792b4 to b8e5cd6 Compare February 4, 2026 09:37

DaanHoogland self-assigned this Feb 4, 2026

DaanHoogland changed the title ~~Create & Delete, Enable & Disable, Enter & Cancel maintenance of Prim…~~ Create, Delete, Enable, Disable, Enter, Cancel maintenance of Primary StoragePool with ONTAP storage Mar 16, 2026

nvazquez reviewed Mar 17, 2026

View reviewed changes

Locharla, Sandeep added 2 commits March 27, 2026 07:08

Addressing review comments

2894466

Merge branch 'netapp-ontap-primary-storage-pool' of https://github.co…

bc4a7f2

…m/NetApp/cloudstack into netapp-ontap-primary-storage-pool

DaanHoogland approved these changes Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

harikrishna-patnala approved these changes Mar 30, 2026

View reviewed changes

Merge branch 'main' into netapp-ontap-primary-storage-pool

1dbfdf6

Addressed comments to use ReflectionToStringBuilderUtils in toString …

163ced4

…methods for models

Conversation

sandeeplocharla commented Feb 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

NetApp ONTAP Storage Plugin

Introduction

ONTAP Terminology

Scope

Current Implementation

Supported Configurations

Storage Pool Lifecycle

Create Storage Pool

Attach to Cluster/Zone

Delete Storage Pool

Configuration Parameters

Types of changes

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Bug Severity

How Has This Been Tested?

Testing Environment:

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Feb 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

kiranchavala commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

kiranchavala commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

sandeeplocharla commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

rajiv-jain-netapp commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

sandeeplocharla commented Feb 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sandeeplocharla commented Feb 3, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Feb 3, 2026

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Feb 4, 2026

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Mar 10, 2026

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Mar 16, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sandeeplocharla commented Feb 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Feb 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

sandeeplocharla commented Feb 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

sandeeplocharla commented Feb 3, 2026 •

edited

Loading

sandeeplocharla commented Mar 27, 2026 •

edited

Loading