A case where a non-existent resource provider in an allocation PUT
request could raise a 400 was not covered. Now it is.
This still leave a ConcurrentUpdateDetected exception (which can
lead to 409) not covered. There's no simple way to cause such a
thing from a gabbi test.
Change-Id: I98243b679ba8101663d459cb9a76f7015078aff7
$.allocations.['75d0f5f7-75d9-458c-b204-f90ac91604ec'].resources.VCPU: 4
$.allocations.['1835b1c9-1c61-45af-9eb3-3e0e9f29487b'].resources.DISK_GB: 10
$.allocations.['1835b1c9-1c61-45af-9eb3-3e0e9f29487b'].resources.VCPU: 8
+
+- name: put an allocation for a not existing resource provider
+ PUT: /allocations/75d0f5f7-75d9-458c-b204-f90ac91604ec
+ request_headers:
+ content-type: application/json
+ data:
+ allocations:
+ - resource_provider:
+ uuid: be8b9cba-e7db-4a12-a386-99b4242167fe
+ resources:
+ DISK_GB: 5
+ VCPU: 4
+ status: 400
+ response_strings:
+ - Allocation for resource provider 'be8b9cba-e7db-4a12-a386-99b4242167fe' that does not exist