Skip to content

Fixed formatting warnings #460

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
DaanHoogland merged 16 commits into from
Dec 19, 2024
Merged

Fixed formatting warnings #460

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
16 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
4d3d938
Fixed formatting of code blocks
sp-techdocs Dec 13, 2024
2bdf2a4
Fixed warnings for list formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 13, 2024
fb23645
Fixed warnings for note formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 13, 2024
d733915
Fixed warnings for title and list formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 13, 2024
94a356f
Fixed warnings for table formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
62d7d84
Fixed warnings for table and title formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
2e6231a
Fixed warnings for list formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
16a2403
Fixed warnings for title formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
49b656e
Fixed warnings for title formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
6271139
Fixed warnings for title formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
2de6178
Fixed formatting of an external link
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
299d3ed
Fixed formatting of an internal link
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
15149bd
Fixed warnings for title formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
8ddb845
Fixed warnings for table formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
1527fb5
Fixed warnings for note formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
b1053e8
Fixed warnings for code formatting
sp-techdocs Dec 16, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Prev Previous commit
Next Next commit
Fixed warnings for list formatting
  • Loading branch information
@sp-techdocs
sp-techdocs committed Dec 16, 2024
commit 2bdf2a45cfc7502c363ae103ca8ff6217a81ff8d
17 changes: 17 additions & 0 deletions source/adminguide/host_and_storage_tags.rst
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -31,30 +31,39 @@ There are two types of host tags:
To explain the behavior of host tags, some examples will be demonstrated with two hosts (Host1 and Host2):

#. Tag setup:

* Host1: h1
* Host2: h2
* Offering: h1

When a VM is created with the offering, the deployment will be carried out on Host1, as it is the one that has the tag compatible with the offering.
Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
When a VM is created with the offering, the deployment will be carried out on Host1, as it is the one that has the tag compatible with the offering.
When a VM is created with the offering, the deployment will be carried out on Host1, as it is the one that has the tag compatible with the offering.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sp-techdocs sp-techdocs Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The idea for indenting this paragraph was to make it a child element of the parent "#. Tag setup:" numbered list item. In the same way as the bulleted list above it is indented. This way both child elements look like belonging to the numbered list item.

For me, removing the indentation for this paragraph would lead to showing it as being at the same logical level as the numbered list item, looking like it is not related to it. And they are actually related.

Overall, it seems the four "#. Tag setup:" numbered list items here are not related, and it might be better to convert them to bulleted list items. While keeping their child content indented.

Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It is a paragraph under "#. Tag Setup", as I see it. and not related to the specific last of the tags mentioned above as it seemed to be before. The indentation is a bit overdone. Thanks anyway, I'm not going to stop these improvements over this.


#. Tag setup:

* Host1: h1
* Host2: h2,h3
* Offering: h3

Hosts and offerings accept a list of tags, with comma (,) being their separator. So in this example, Host2 has the h2 and h3 tags. When a VM is created with the offering, the deployment will be carried out on Host2, as it is the one that has the tag compatible with the offering.
Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Hosts and offerings accept a list of tags, with comma (,) being their separator. So in this example, Host2 has the h2 and h3 tags. When a VM is created with the offering, the deployment will be carried out on Host2, as it is the one that has the tag compatible with the offering.
Hosts and offerings accept a list of tags, with comma (,) being their separator. So in this example, Host2 has the h2 and h3 tags. When a VM is created with the offering, the deployment will be carried out on Host2, as it is the one that has the tag compatible with the offering.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sp-techdocs sp-techdocs Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, it might be better to keep the indentation.


#. Tag setup:

* Host1: h1
* Host2: h2,h3
* Offering: (no tag)

When the offering does not have tags, it will be possible to deploy the VM on any host.
Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
When the offering does not have tags, it will be possible to deploy the VM on any host.
When the offering does not have tags, it will be possible to deploy the VM on any host.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sp-techdocs sp-techdocs Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, it might be better to keep the indentation.


#. Tag setup:

* Host1: (no tag)
* Host2: h2
* Offering: h3

None of the hosts have compatible tags and it will not be possible to deploy a VM with the offering. However, CloudStack ignores this behavior when a host is manually selected.
Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
None of the hosts have compatible tags and it will not be possible to deploy a VM with the offering. However, CloudStack ignores this behavior when a host is manually selected.
None of the hosts have compatible tags and it will not be possible to deploy a VM with the offering. However, CloudStack ignores this behavior when a host is manually selected.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sp-techdocs sp-techdocs Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, it might be better to keep the indentation.


.. _strict-host-tags:

Strict Host Tags
-----------------
During certain operations, such as changing the compute offering or starting or
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -96,23 +105,31 @@ Storage tags are responsible for directing volumes to compatible primary storage
To explain the behavior of storage tags, some examples will be demonstrated:

#. Tag setup:

* Storage: A
* Offering: A,B

Storage and offering accept a list of tags, with the comma (,) being their separator. Therefore, in this example, the offering has tags A and B. In this example, it will not be possible to allocate the volume, as all the offering tags must exist in the storage. Although the storage has the A tag, it does not have the B tag.
Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Storage and offering accept a list of tags, with the comma (,) being their separator. Therefore, in this example, the offering has tags A and B. In this example, it will not be possible to allocate the volume, as all the offering tags must exist in the storage. Although the storage has the A tag, it does not have the B tag.
Storage and offering accept a list of tags, with the comma (,) being their separator. Therefore, in this example, the offering has tags A and B. In this example, it will not be possible to allocate the volume, as all the offering tags must exist in the storage. Although the storage has the A tag, it does not have the B tag.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sp-techdocs sp-techdocs Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, it might be better to keep the indentation. And convert the numbered list to bulleted.


#. Tag setup:

* Storage: A,B,C,D,X
* Offering: A,B,C

In this example, it will be possible to allocate the volume, as all the offering tags exist in the storage.
Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
In this example, it will be possible to allocate the volume, as all the offering tags exist in the storage.
In this example, it will be possible to allocate the volume, as all the offering tags exist in the storage.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sp-techdocs sp-techdocs Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, it might be better to keep the indentation.


#. Tag setup:

* Storage: A, B, C
* Offering: (no tag)

In this example, it will be possible to allocate the volume, as the offering does not have any tag requirements.
Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
In this example, it will be possible to allocate the volume, as the offering does not have any tag requirements.
In this example, it will be possible to allocate the volume, as the offering does not have any tag requirements.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sp-techdocs sp-techdocs Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, it might be better to keep the indentation.


#. Tag setup:

* Storage: (no tag)
* Offering: D,E

In this example, it will not be possible to allocate the volume, as the storage does not have tags, therefore it does not meet the offering requirements.
Copy link
Contributor

@DaanHoogland DaanHoogland Dec 18, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
In this example, it will not be possible to allocate the volume, as the storage does not have tags, therefore it does not meet the offering requirements.
In this example, it will not be possible to allocate the volume, as the storage does not have tags, therefore it does not meet the offering requirements.

Copy link
Contributor Author

@sp-techdocs sp-techdocs Dec 19, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

As above, it might be better to keep the indentation.


In short, if the offering has tags, the storage will need to have all the tags for the volume to be allocated. If the offering does not have tags, the volume can be allocated, regardless of whether the storage has a tag or not.
Expand Down