[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9268?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15247571#comment-15247571
]
ASF subversion and git services commented on CLOUDSTACK-9268:
-------------------------------------------------------------
Commit e3e5be8dedb3f270c45b1e8b65952ac62fbe46a6 in cloudstack's branch
refs/heads/4.7 from [~koushikd]
[ https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cloudstack.git;h=e3e5be8 ]
Merge pull request #1394 from nitin-maharana/CloudStack-Nitin25_4.7
CLOUDSTACK-9268: Display VM in Load balancing rule in UISteps of Repro:
=============
1:Create VMs
2:Make LoadBalancing rule in GUI
Name:WWW
PrivatePort:80
PublicPort:80
Add VMs:some VMs
Expected Result:
==============
The VMs which has been already assigned is should not be listed when you add
the VM to an existing rule.
Actual Result:
===========
The VMs which has been already assigned is still being listed when you add the
VM to an existing rule.
Fix:
===
Added jsonObj to newly created row in multiedit.js to stop listing the same VM
again.
* pr/1394:
CLOUDSTACK-9268: Display VM in Load balancing rule in UI
Signed-off-by: Koushik Das <[email protected]>
> Display VM in Load balancing rule in UI
> ---------------------------------------
>
> Key: CLOUDSTACK-9268
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-9268
> Project: CloudStack
> Issue Type: Bug
> Security Level: Public(Anyone can view this level - this is the
> default.)
> Reporter: Nitin Kumar Maharana
>
> Steps of Reproducing:
> ==================
> 1:Create VMs
> 2:Make LoadBalancing rule in GUI
> Name:WWW
> PrivatePort:80
> PublicPort:80
> Add VMs:some VMs
> The VMs which has been already assigned is still being listed when you add
> the VM to an existing rule.
> In addition to this, when we remove a VM, and again try to add for that
> rule,it will not list that VM in the list.
> The issue doesn’t occur if you go back to the network tab and view the
> loadbalance rules again.
> A page refresh is solving the issue, but need to resolve this issue without a
> refresh.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
