Microsoft.OperationalInsights: Adding table migrate. #17654
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Hi, @dulikvor Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips. Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. [email protected] |
|
[Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks. |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The read only property has changed from 'true' to 'false'. New: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/preview/2021-12-01-preview/Tables.json#L615:9 Old: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/preview/2021-12-01-preview/Tables.json#L573:9 |
|
The new version is adding a path that was not found in the old version. New: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/preview/2021-12-01-preview/Tables.json#L295:5 |
️⚠️LintDiff: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
- Linted configuring files (Based on source branch, openapi-validator v1.10.1 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.10 )
- Linted configuring files (Based on target branch, openapi-validator v1.10.1 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.10 )
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| Do not have duplicate name of x-ms-example, make sure every x-ms-example name unique. Duplicate x-ms-example: TablesGet Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/preview/2021-12-01-preview/Tables.json#L300 |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
Resource type naming must follow camel case. Path: '/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourcegroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.OperationalInsights/workspaces/{workspaceName}/intelligencePacks/{intelligencePackName}/Disable' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/IntelligencePacks.json#L37 |
|
Resource type naming must follow camel case. Path: '/subscriptions/{subscriptionId}/resourcegroups/{resourceGroupName}/providers/Microsoft.OperationalInsights/workspaces/{workspaceName}/intelligencePacks/{intelligencePackName}/Enable' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/IntelligencePacks.json#L78 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/DataSources.json#L79 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/DataSources.json#L126 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/DataSources.json#L167 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/DataSources.json#L217 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/IntelligencePacks.json#L71 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/IntelligencePacks.json#L112 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/IntelligencePacks.json#L146 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/LinkedServices.json#L79 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/LinkedServices.json#L130 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/LinkedServices.json#L178 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/LinkedServices.json#L214 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/LinkedStorageAccounts.json#L75 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/LinkedStorageAccounts.json#L112 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/LinkedStorageAccounts.json#L146 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/LinkedStorageAccounts.json#L177 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/ManagementGroups.json#L63 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/OperationStatuses.json#L71 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/SharedKeys.json#L63 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/SharedKeys.json#L99 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/Usages.json#L63 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/StorageInsightConfigs.json#L79 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/StorageInsightConfigs.json#L126 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/StorageInsightConfigs.json#L167 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/StorageInsightConfigs.json#L203 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/SavedSearches.json#L70 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/SavedSearches.json#L117 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/SavedSearches.json#L158 |
|
The response is defined but without a default error response implementation.Consider adding it.' Location: Microsoft.OperationalInsights/stable/2020-08-01/SavedSearches.json#L194 |
️⚠️Avocado: 1 Warnings warning [Detail]
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| The default tag contains multiple API versions swaggers. readme: specification/operationalinsights/resource-manager/readme.md tag: specification/operationalinsights/resource-manager/readme.md#tag-package-2021-12-01-preview |
️️✔️~[Staging] ApiReadinessCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️Cross-Version Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
️❌CredScan: 0 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]
️️✔️SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
️️✔️PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
️️✔️Lint(RPaaS) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Lint(RPaaS).
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
|
Hi @dulikvor, one or multiple breaking change(s) is detected in your PR. Please check out the breaking change(s), and provide business justification in the PR comment and @ PR assignee why you must have these change(s), and how external customer impact can be mitigated. Please ensure to follow breaking change policy to request breaking change review and approval before proceeding swagger PR review. |
|
NewApiVersionRequired reason: |
This was referenced Feb 3, 2022
|
The two claimed breaking change are with no effect on customers.
|
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
added
the
WaitForARMFeedback
|
Hi, @dulikvor your PR are labelled with WaitForARMFeedback. A notification email will be sent out shortly afterwards to notify ARM review board([email protected]). |
Please get approval using the breaking change process outlined in the PR description. If you feel the validation flagged the changes in error please give them that feedback as well. |
JeffreyRichter
added
the
Approved-BreakingChange
pilor
reviewed
Feb 8, 2022
| } | ||
| }, | ||
| "operationId": "Tables_Migrate", | ||
| "description": "Migrate a Log Analytics workspace table.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this description should indicate what it is migrating the table to. The API doesn't take input and it is not obvious
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @pilor, thank you for the comment. a better description was provided.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Signing off but you may want to consider taking a body with an enum indicating what migration is being performed. This action has a very generic name "migrate" and will be confusing if you have another migration scenario in the future
pilor
added
the
ARMChangesRequested
pilor
reviewed
Feb 8, 2022
| } | ||
| ], | ||
| "responses": { | ||
| "200": { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
migration can be accomplished synchronously?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, only in sync manner, long running operation or partial results are not supported.
pilor
added
ARMSignedOff
This was referenced Feb 9, 2022
FredericHeem
pushed a commit
to grucloud/azure-rest-api-specs
that referenced
this pull request
Mar 7, 2022
* Microsoft.OperationalInsights: Adding table migrate. * Better description for migrate.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:
Contribution checklist:
If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.
ARM API Review Checklist
Otherwise your PR may be subject to ARM review requirements. Complete the following:
Check this box if any of the following apply to the PR so that label "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added automatically to begin ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays to the manifest.
-[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you are using OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. More details, refer to the wiki.
Ensure you've reviewed following guidelines including ARM resource provider contract and REST guidelines. Estimated time (4 hours). This is required before you can request review from ARM API Review board.
If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged with urgency, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.
Breaking Change Review Checklist
If any of the following scenarios apply to the PR, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.
Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.