[xujiantop-crypto]

Summary

Custom root disk IOPS are stored in VM details as minIops and maxIops. CloudOrchestrator was reading the API parameter names miniops and maxiops, so the values were not propagated to the root DiskOfferingInfo during VM deployment from a template.

This change:

• adds canonical VM-detail constants for minIops and maxIops
• uses those constants when building the root disk offering
• adds a regression test that verifies custom root IOPS reach the VM allocation call

Fixes #14103

Testing

mvn -pl engine/orchestration -am -Dtest=CloudOrchestratorTest -DfailIfNoTests=false test
Tests run: 1, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0
33/33 reactor modules SUCCESS
Checkstyle: 0 violations

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 16.37%. Comparing base (6e4413d) to head (41acb91).
⚠️ Report is 4 commits behind head on 4.20.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               4.20   #14114      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     16.36%   16.37%   +0.01%     
- Complexity    13592    13599       +7     
============================================
  Files          5669     5669              
  Lines        501475   501475              
  Branches      60913    60913              
============================================
+ Hits          82067    82128      +61     
+ Misses       410209   410137      -72     
- Partials       9199     9210      +11     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	4.14% <ø> (ø)
unittests	17.24% <100.00%> (+0.01%)	⬆️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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.

[rajiv-jain-netapp]

can you put some UI screenshots where you find these workflows working?

[DaanHoogland]

tested by reporter (see #14103 (comment))

[DaanHoogland]

clgtm

[Damans227]

should the min and max check on deploy use these new names too? it still looks up the old ones, so a min above max now reaches the volume without an error

[DaanHoogland]

@Damans227 what change are you suggesting (if any)?

[Damans227]

the check that stops a min above max on deploy is in UserVmManagerImpl, and it still looks up miniops and maxiops. i suggest it reads the new minIops and maxIops names too, so a bad pair errors out instead of reaching the volume.