Nas backup raise event for succeeded / failed / timed out

[daviftorres]

Description

This PR relates to #11727

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

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

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

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 3 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 17.56%. Comparing base (f63118c) to head (ff58343).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...rg/apache/cloudstack/backup/NASBackupProvider.java	0.00%	3 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main   #11884   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     17.55%   17.56%           
  Complexity    15529    15529           
=========================================
  Files          5909     5909           
  Lines        529012   529012           
  Branches      64604    64604           
=========================================
+ Hits          92892    92912   +20     
+ Misses       425671   425652   -19     
+ Partials      10449    10448    -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	3.58% <ø> (ø)
unittests	18.63% <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]

@daviftorres the code doesn't look like it is raising any events for the backup failure. I only see the change to not delete the backup entry in case of any error. Is this a work in progress?

IMO, just keeping the backups db entry without any other information on the failure doesn't help much.
If this could be tied with events so that the Backup in error state has an event which shows the cause of failure (specially for scheduled backups), would be a great addition.
I have shared more on my thought process here : #11727 (comment)

[daviftorres]

Bug already fixed on ACS 4.21 by @abh1sar (79f83db).

[daviftorres]

Dear @abh1sar , I nave no Java skills to work on fix feature improvement.

I am happy that the bug is fixed but the notification / awareness of failures is paramount when we have SLA with clients for backups.

I closed the PR because I was probably on the wrong path. Do you think we can keep the issue (#11727) open so we may get events / notifications added at some point?

[abh1sar]

Hi @daviftorres
Thanks for participating and taking interest in the BnR framework. Your feedback is very valuable.
I'll reopen issue #11727.