Skip to content

Issue 440/485 - Limit flag for unlimited results on Get-RubrikReportData #488

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.

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
merged 7 commits into from
Oct 29, 2019

Conversation

mwpreston
Copy link
Contributor

@mwpreston mwpreston commented Oct 29, 2019

Description

The API response from Rubrik is limited to a maximum of 10,000 lines when returning data. In order to view more, pagination and the cursor attribute must be used. This can become difficult for the end-user.

Rather than require the end-user to use our pagination, we can simply build it into the cmdlet. Specifying a -Limit of -1 will now return all the results, ignoring the limit.

Related Issue

Addresses Issue 440 and Issue 485 in getting around the maximum limit defined within the API of 10000.

  • If suggesting a new feature or change, please discuss it in an issue first.
  • If fixing a bug, there should be an issue describing it with steps to reproduce

Motivation and Context

Why is this change required? What problem does it solve?

This further simplifies the usage of our PowerShell SDK for our customers.

How Has This Been Tested?

Tested within the TM lab on a 5.0 cluster.

  • Please describe in detail how you tested your changes.
  • Include details of your testing environment, and the tests you ran to see how your change affects other areas of the code, etc.

Screenshots (if appropriate):

Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce? Put an x in all the boxes that apply:

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

Go over all the following points, and put an x in all the boxes that apply. If you're unsure about any of these, don't hesitate to ask. We're here to help!

  • My code follows the code style of this project.
  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTION document.
  • I have updated the CHANGELOG file accordingly for the version that this merge modifies.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

@mwpreston mwpreston requested a review from jaapbrasser October 29, 2019 20:04
jaapbrasser
jaapbrasser previously approved these changes Oct 29, 2019
Copy link
Contributor

@jaapbrasser jaapbrasser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

Copy link
Contributor

@jaapbrasser jaapbrasser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

:shipit:

@jaapbrasser jaapbrasser merged commit 640af33 into devel Oct 29, 2019
@jaapbrasser jaapbrasser deleted the mwpreston-485 branch October 29, 2019 22:58
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants