Fixes #943: Partial update of custom fields is not idempotent #944
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
cfiehe
force-pushed
the
fix_partial_update_of_custom_fields_is_not_idempotent
branch
3 times, most recently
from
fbf7d17 to
5b5b830
Compare
Contributor
|
Would appreciate the addition of unit tests based on your bug description in the issue |
cfiehe
force-pushed
the
fix_partial_update_of_custom_fields_is_not_idempotent
branch
2 times, most recently
from
839e719 to
7132745
Compare
…empotent It is important that the object's custom fields dictionary contains only those keys that were given by the user. Otherwise the following dictionary comparison does not work and leads to the result, that there is a difference in state even when the entries already have the desired state. The issue is caused, because the comparison takes also those entries into account that were not given by the user. Signed-off-by: Christoph Fiehe <[email protected]>
cfiehe
force-pushed
the
fix_partial_update_of_custom_fields_is_not_idempotent
branch
from
7132745 to
c3fb7b9
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
I have modified the test cases. Maybe we must increase the test scope in the future and add dedicated tests for custom field handling. |
rodvand
pushed a commit
to rodvand/ansible_modules
that referenced
this pull request
Feb 24, 2023
…empotent (netbox-community#944) It is important that the object's custom fields dictionary contains only those keys that were given by the user. Otherwise the following dictionary comparison does not work and leads to the result, that there is a difference in state even when the entries already have the desired state. The issue is caused, because the comparison takes also those entries into account that were not given by the user. Signed-off-by: Christoph Fiehe <[email protected]>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
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.
It is important that the object's custom fields dictionary contains only those keys that were given by the user. Otherwise the following dictionary comparison does not work and leads to the result, that there is a difference in state even when the entries already have the desired state. The issue is caused, because the comparison takes also those entries into account that were not given by the user.
Signed-off-by: Christoph Fiehe [email protected]
Related Issue
#943: Partial update of custom fields is not idempotent
New Behavior
Partial updates of custom fields are now idempotent.
Contrast to Current Behavior
This fix corrects the misleading diff report and ensures idempotency when only some custom fields are updated.
Discussion: Benefits and Drawbacks
This fix is fully backward-compatible and ensures idempotency in case of custom field updates.
Double Check
develbranch.