Update backup framework enabled config to global scope #11567

sureshanaparti · 2025-09-03T12:53:25Z

Description

This PR enables backup framework when the config 'backup.framework.enabled' is set to true in Zone scope and not in Global setting. It checks backup framework enabled config is set to true or not in any of the zone scope setting when disabled in Global scope, thus supporting backup in a specific zone (and not entire cloud deployment).

Doc PR: apache/cloudstack-documentation#579

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

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

Enable 'backup.framework.enabled' config in global settings.
Restart management server, notice the backup APIs discovered and relevant sections shown in UI.

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

sureshanaparti · 2025-09-03T12:54:08Z

@blueorangutan package

codecov · 2025-09-03T13:00:56Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 16.26%. Comparing base (b7fc717) to head (e036a51).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...rg/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManagerImpl.java	0.00%	8 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               4.20   #11567   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     16.26%   16.26%           
  Complexity    13419    13419           
=========================================
  Files          5658     5658           
  Lines        499425   499425           
  Branches      60613    60612    -1     
=========================================
+ Hits          81232    81235    +3     
+ Misses       409143   409142    -1     
+ Partials       9050     9048    -2

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	`4.03% <ø> (ø)`
unittests	`17.12% <0.00%> (+<0.01%)`	⬆️

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.

abh1sar

We should remove this at line 983. Otherwise backup apis won't show if backup framework is enabled at zone but disabled globally.

        if (!BackupFrameworkEnabled.value()) {
            return cmdList;
        }

sureshanaparti · 2025-09-09T10:38:56Z

@blueorangutan package

Copilot

Pull Request Overview

This PR moves the backup framework enabled configuration from zone-scoped to global-scoped, simplifying the backup management by removing per-zone enablement checks. The change affects how the backup framework determines if it's enabled, removing the need to check individual zones.

Key Changes

Removed zone-specific backup framework configuration support
Simplified backup enablement logic to use global configuration only
Updated error messages to reflect global scope

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File	Description
api/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManager.java	Removes zone scope from backup framework configuration key
server/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManagerImpl.java	Updates backup enablement checks to use global configuration and removes zone-specific logic

_{Tip: Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. Create the file or learn how to get started.}

server/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManagerImpl.java

blueorangutan · 2025-09-09T10:40:06Z

@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2025-09-09T13:28:05Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✖️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 14918

sureshanaparti · 2025-09-24T07:10:34Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-09-24T07:12:04Z

@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2025-09-24T08:24:01Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 15153

sureshanaparti · 2025-09-25T07:49:02Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2025-09-25T07:50:04Z

@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2025-09-25T09:16:08Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 15163

sureshanaparti · 2025-09-26T08:39:45Z

@blueorangutan test

blueorangutan · 2025-09-26T08:42:05Z

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

sureshanaparti · 2025-10-14T11:48:52Z

@DaanHoogland No, ConfigKey.valueInScope(Scope, Long) fetches the value in that scope with id specified, if it doesn't exist, picks the global value.

reading the title of this PR that seems to be the intention?!?

updated title & description.

shwstppr · 2025-10-14T16:07:57Z

server/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManagerImpl.java

    public List<Class<?>> getCommands() {
        final List<Class<?>> cmdList = new ArrayList<Class<?>>();
-        if (!BackupFrameworkEnabled.value()) {
+        if (!BackupFrameworkEnabled.value() && !BackupFrameworkEnabled.hasValueInScope(Boolean.TRUE.toString())) {


We should not restrict/allow API access based on the zone config value. It might break UI/clients.

@shwstppr it doesn't restrict API access. it allows API access if it is enabled in global or in any zone (not mandatory to enable in global scope). previously, enabling at global level is mandatory for API access.

@sureshanaparti I understand that, but won't it create an issue in UI showing backup-related options for zones and for zone resources where backup feature is not enabled?
eg: assignVirtualMachineToBackupOffering action will start showing for all VMs, deploy VM form will start showing backup options even for zone where option isn't available.

Though, this could be currently true for the other way around as well

DaanHoogland · 2025-12-16T15:12:38Z

@shwstppr @weizhouapache @abh1sar can you have another look, please?

shwstppr

I'm fine if others think APIs should be controlled with zone configs, but I don't find it consistent with the current auto-discovery behaviour of clients

shwstppr · 2025-12-17T07:38:59Z

server/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManagerImpl.java

    public List<Class<?>> getCommands() {
        final List<Class<?>> cmdList = new ArrayList<Class<?>>();
-        if (!BackupFrameworkEnabled.value()) {
+        if (!BackupFrameworkEnabled.value() && !BackupFrameworkEnabled.hasValueInScope(Boolean.TRUE.toString())) {


@sureshanaparti I understand that, but won't it create an issue in UI showing backup-related options for zones and for zone resources where backup feature is not enabled?
eg: assignVirtualMachineToBackupOffering action will start showing for all VMs, deploy VM form will start showing backup options even for zone where option isn't available.

Though, this could be currently true for the other way around as well

abh1sar · 2025-12-18T07:58:05Z

Sorry @sureshanaparti , I don't remember if it was discussed before. But what about making this config global scope only?
cc @shwstppr

nvazquez · 2026-01-26T15:18:26Z

Hi @sureshanaparti @shwstppr are all the review comments addressed on this PR? If that is the case, is it ready for testing?

shwstppr · 2026-01-27T04:35:07Z

@nvazquez I don't have a strong opinion either way and others can chime in

weizhouapache · 2026-01-27T10:12:31Z

if the new behavior applies on all the zone/global settings, and documented , I am ok with it

abh1sar · 2026-01-28T08:52:20Z

I think it would be better to make this setting global.
It makes sense then that all the zones see backup related APIs in the UI.
Backup offerings are created per Zone by the Admin. So admin can just created backup offerings for the Zone where they want to.
Other zones will see the API Assign Backup Offering but there wouldn't be any offering to assign to.
Admins can still configure different providers for each zone.

With the solution of having per Zone setting and still showing backup APIs to other zones, there will be confusion and IMO it doesn't solve anything.

…cking in global scope)

This reverts commit b0b037f.

This reverts commit 2dffcda.

…opie id)" This reverts commit 878aa4c.

This reverts commit 1543511.

sureshanaparti · 2026-01-29T07:36:05Z

I think it would be better to make this setting global. It makes sense then that all the zones see backup related APIs in the UI. Backup offerings are created per Zone by the Admin. So admin can just created backup offerings for the Zone where they want to. Other zones will see the API Assign Backup Offering but there wouldn't be any offering to assign to. Admins can still configure different providers for each zone.

With the solution of having per Zone setting and still showing backup APIs to other zones, there will be confusion and IMO it doesn't solve anything.

@abh1sar as discussed, backup config is updated to global setting again (reverted current changes). please check.

sureshanaparti · 2026-01-29T07:44:23Z

@blueorangutan package

blueorangutan · 2026-01-29T07:46:04Z

@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

blueorangutan · 2026-01-29T08:55:11Z

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 16610

boring-cyborg bot added the component:backup label Sep 3, 2025

sureshanaparti requested a review from abh1sar September 3, 2025 12:54

abh1sar reviewed Sep 3, 2025

View reviewed changes

sureshanaparti changed the title ~~Check backup framework enabled config in zone scope first (before checking in global scope)~~ [WIP] Check backup framework enabled config in zone scope first (before checking in global scope) Sep 4, 2025

sureshanaparti requested a review from rajujith September 4, 2025 08:04

sureshanaparti force-pushed the check-backup-framework-disable-in-zone branch from 2f0ee6d to b0b037f Compare September 9, 2025 10:35

boring-cyborg bot added the component:api label Sep 9, 2025

sureshanaparti changed the title ~~[WIP] Check backup framework enabled config in zone scope first (before checking in global scope)~~ Update backup framework enabled config to global scope Sep 9, 2025

sureshanaparti requested review from abh1sar and Copilot September 9, 2025 10:38

Copilot AI reviewed Sep 9, 2025

View reviewed changes

server/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManagerImpl.java Show resolved Hide resolved

server/src/main/java/org/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManagerImpl.java Show resolved Hide resolved

sureshanaparti changed the title ~~Update backup framework enabled config to global scope~~ [WIP] Update backup framework enabled config to global scope Sep 10, 2025

boring-cyborg bot added the component:storage label Sep 24, 2025

sureshanaparti force-pushed the check-backup-framework-disable-in-zone branch 2 times, most recently from 233ce0d to 08aaaaf Compare September 24, 2025 07:09

sureshanaparti force-pushed the check-backup-framework-disable-in-zone branch from 08aaaaf to 2dffcda Compare September 25, 2025 07:48

sureshanaparti changed the title ~~[WIP] Update backup framework enabled config to global scope~~ Check backup framework enabled config in zone scope first (before checking in global scope) Sep 26, 2025

shwstppr reviewed Oct 14, 2025

View reviewed changes

weizhouapache modified the milestones: 4.20.2, 4.20.3 Oct 23, 2025

DaanHoogland added the status:needs-review label Dec 16, 2025

shwstppr reviewed Dec 17, 2025

View reviewed changes

shwstppr self-requested a review January 27, 2026 04:34

sureshanaparti added 8 commits January 29, 2026 12:58

Check backup framework enabled config in zone scope first (before che…

5d046c7

…cking in global scope)

Update backup.framework.enabled config to Global scope

cc43873

Revert "Update backup.framework.enabled config to Global scope"

91d1a5c

This reverts commit b0b037f.

Check the config key and name exists in its scope (without scopie id)

a820333

code improvements

af84896

Revert "code improvements"

0ed7291

This reverts commit 2dffcda.

Revert "Check the config key and name exists in its scope (without sc…

8d02dc0

…opie id)" This reverts commit 878aa4c.

Revert "Revert "Update backup.framework.enabled config to Global scope""

e036a51

This reverts commit 1543511.

sureshanaparti force-pushed the check-backup-framework-disable-in-zone branch from 2dffcda to e036a51 Compare January 29, 2026 07:28

sureshanaparti changed the title ~~Enable backup framework when the config 'backup.framework.enabled' is set to true in Zone scope and not in Global setting~~ Update backup framework enabled config to global scope Jan 29, 2026

sureshanaparti requested a review from abh1sar January 29, 2026 07:34

abh1sar added the status:testing label Jan 29, 2026

abh1sar self-assigned this Jan 29, 2026

Update backup framework enabled config to global scope #11567

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Update backup framework enabled config to global scope #11567

Conversation

sureshanaparti commented Sep 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Description

Types of changes

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

Bug Severity

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti commented Sep 3, 2025

Uh oh!

codecov bot commented Sep 3, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

abh1sar left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti commented Sep 9, 2025

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull Request Overview

Key Changes

Reviewed Changes

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Sep 9, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Sep 9, 2025

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti commented Sep 24, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Sep 24, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Sep 24, 2025

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti commented Sep 26, 2025

Uh oh!

blueorangutan commented Sep 26, 2025

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti commented Oct 14, 2025

Uh oh!

shwstppr Oct 14, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sureshanaparti Oct 14, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shwstppr Dec 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

DaanHoogland commented Dec 16, 2025

Uh oh!

shwstppr left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

shwstppr Dec 17, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

abh1sar commented Dec 18, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

nvazquez commented Jan 26, 2026

Uh oh!

shwstppr commented Jan 27, 2026

sureshanaparti commented Sep 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

codecov bot commented Sep 3, 2025 •

edited

Loading

shwstppr Oct 14, 2025 •

edited

Loading

abh1sar commented Dec 18, 2025 •

edited

Loading