feat(ui): Requests info for Cpu and Mem added to Pod details

[surajyadav1108]

Resolves issue: #19457

1. Added the pod requests info to the Pod tooltip.

• This will only show if the pod currently has some reserved requests (running pods with allocated requests).

• When the pod completes successfully or fails with an error, the requests will be shown as 0 since they are no longer reserved.
  (also if the resources aren't declared )

2. For the original request of adding the top/parent resource groups,

• there wasn't a good place to add a hover. Instead, I added an info div, similar to the one used for creation and revision, for the group. The tooltip on hover shows the combined requests for the group.

Added tests in info.go f and utils.test for scenerios of completed and failed state with allocated resources.

whole-pod-view-test.mp4

Checklist:

• Either (a) I've created an enhancement proposal and discussed it with the community, (b) this is a bug fix, or (c) this does not need to be in the release notes.
• The title of the PR states what changed and the related issues number (used for the release note).
• The title of the PR conforms to the Toolchain Guide
• I've included "Closes [ISSUE #]" or "Fixes [ISSUE #]" in the description to automatically close the associated issue.
• I've updated both the CLI and UI to expose my feature, or I plan to submit a second PR with them.
• Does this PR require documentation updates?
• I've updated documentation as required by this PR.
• I have signed off all my commits as required by DCO
• I have written unit and/or e2e tests for my change. PRs without these are unlikely to be merged.
• My build is green (troubleshooting builds).
• My new feature complies with the feature status guidelines.
• I have added a brief description of why this PR is necessary and/or what this PR solves.
• Optional. My organization is added to USERS.md.
• Optional. For bug fixes, I've indicated what older releases this fix should be cherry-picked into (this may or may not happen depending on risk/complexity).

[bunnyshell]

❗ Preview Environment undeploy from Bunnyshell failed

See: Environment Details | Pipeline Logs

Available commands (reply to this comment):

• 🚀 /bns:deploy to redeploy the environment
• ❌ /bns:delete to try again to remove the environment

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 60.21%. Comparing base (678f61b) to head (32299ea).
⚠️ Report is 783 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master   #20637   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   60.20%   60.21%           
=======================================
  Files         347      347           
  Lines       59274    59282    +8     
=======================================
+ Hits        35688    35694    +6     
- Misses      20722    20726    +4     
+ Partials     2864     2862    -2     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[andrii-korotkov-verkada]

LGMT, have some minor comments

[agaudreault]

@surajyadav1108 I do like the implementation of 1), but the "Request?" box seems very weird and out of place. I dont really see the necessity to have this information if we are not in the node view. cpu/mem seems more like advanced configuration that you will go look at the resource details/manifest for.

[surajyadav1108]

@agaudreault ok we can have just 1st implementation of rows in tooltip then.

[surajyadav1108]

Removed Requests box... you can merge this now @agaudreault

improved-pod-resource-view.mp4

[agaudreault]

As seen on the recording, the tooltip style seems broken since the list items are truncated on the pod that is "Progressing". It may be because the size of the tooltip is set based on the pod name

[surajyadav1108]

Yes, the tooltip is set based on the pod name or on content if its too short. the intention was just to move the onClick to the header title instead of the entire pod header container. I’ve now reverted it back to how it was.

no truncation anymore since I reduced the label length for CPU and memory requests.

[agaudreault]

Based on the code above, it is very likely that the reason string could be set to a more "detailed" value, such as ExitCode:%s. Instead of basing the condition on the string, use the bool variable available above such as initializing and hasRunning, or add a new one.

[surajyadav1108]

yes, used !isPodPhaseTerminal no need to use these initializing hasRunning as these are requests. It's also helpful for the user to see when pods aren't scheduled.

[surajyadav1108]

@agaudreault
Sorry for responding after almost a month had a lot going on

this is how it looks now

pod-cpu-mem-refactor.mp4