feat(commitmentopts/azure): probe Savings Plans offerings for live validation by cristim · Pull Request #724 · LeanerCloud/CUDly

cristim · 2026-05-25T23:40:51Z

Closes #659.

Design

Azure has no catalog-listing endpoint (no Describe*Offerings equivalent), so the probe calls armbillingbenefits.RPClient.ValidatePurchase for each candidate (term, billingPlan) pair instead:

6 candidates: P1Y / P3Y / P5Y × upfront (nil BillingPlan) / monthly (P1M)
A Valid=false response → "not offered, skip" (no error)
Any other API error aborts the probe and propagates (matches AWS all-or-nothing policy)
P5Y included up front and dropped at runtime if rejected — combos always reflect live API reality

Files

internal/commitmentopts/probe_azure.go — AzureSPProber struct + AzureSPValidateAPI interface
internal/commitmentopts/probe_azure_test.go — 12 unit tests

Interface duplication note

AzureSPValidateAPI duplicates the one-method interface from providers/azure/services/savingsplans.RPValidateAPI — importing the provider package from internal/ would cause a circular dependency. A comment in the file documents this intentional duplication.

Deps

armbillingbenefits moved from // indirect to direct in go.mod (go mod tidy pre-commit hook handled).

Tests

internal/commitmentopts/...: 71 pass (59 pre-existing + 12 new)
go vet / gofmt / golangci-lint clean

Summary by CodeRabbit

New Features
- Added discovery functionality for Azure Savings Plans contract terms (1, 3, and 5 years) and payment options (upfront and monthly).
Tests
- Added comprehensive test coverage for Savings Plans discovery across all configuration scenarios and error conditions.

…lidation Adds AzureSPProber to internal/commitmentopts, mirroring the AWS RI probe pattern for Azure Savings Plans (term/payment validation). Azure has no catalog-listing endpoint equivalent to AWS Describe*Offerings, so the prober calls RPClient.ValidatePurchase for each candidate (term, billingPlan) pair and retains those the API accepts as live Combos. Candidate set: P1Y/P3Y/P5Y x upfront/monthly; P5Y is dropped at runtime if ValidatePurchase rejects it so persisted combos always reflect live API reality. AzureSPValidateAPI is a one-method interface matching *armbillingbenefits.RPClient so tests substitute a struct mock without touching the Azure RP. DefaultAzureProbers() returns the default slice for service wiring. Closes #659

coderabbitai · 2026-05-25T23:40:56Z

No actionable comments were generated in the recent review. 🎉

ℹ️ Recent review info

⚙️ Run configuration

Configuration used: defaults

Review profile: CHILL

Plan: Pro

Run ID: e3dd9184-34d7-4c38-8669-8d464a98b383

📥 Commits

Reviewing files that changed from the base of the PR and between 5abf40b and 24ee609.

📒 Files selected for processing (3)

go.mod
internal/commitmentopts/probe_azure.go
internal/commitmentopts/probe_azure_test.go

📝 Walkthrough

Walkthrough

This PR adds an Azure Savings Plans probe implementation to discover which term and billing plan combinations are accepted by Azure's Billing Benefits ValidatePurchase endpoint, alongside dependency setup and comprehensive test coverage.

Changes

Azure Savings Plans Probe

Layer / File(s)	Summary
Dependency Management `go.mod`	Azure SDK module `armbillingbenefits` is re-added at `v1.0.0` as a direct require entry without the indirect marker.
Azure Savings Plans Probe Implementation `internal/commitmentopts/probe_azure.go`	`AzureSPProber` iterates over candidate 1/3/5-year terms with all-upfront and monthly billing plan variants, constructs minimal `SavingsPlanPurchaseValidateRequest` payloads (placeholder subscription, USD, hourly grain, compute SKU), calls Azure's `ValidatePurchase` endpoint via injected `AzureSPValidateAPI`, interprets per-benefit `Valid` flags to determine accepted combos, and aborts on error. Exports `Service()`, `ProbeAzure()`, and `DefaultAzureProbers()` factory.
Comprehensive Test Coverage `internal/commitmentopts/probe_azure_test.go`	Tests validate `Service()` returns `savingsplans`, `ProbeAzure()` behavior across happy paths (all/some/none valid combos, empty benefits, nil `Valid` flags), error handling (SDK errors, client construction failures), exact combo field values (`Provider=azure`, `Service=savingsplans`, `TermYears`, `Payment`), request term values, and billing plan logic (upfront combos omit `BillingPlan`, monthly combos set `BillingPlan` to `P1M`).

Sequence Diagram

sequenceDiagram
  participant Caller
  participant AzureSPProber
  participant client as AzureSPValidateAPI
  participant response as ValidatePurchase Response

  Caller->>AzureSPProber: ProbeAzure(ctx, cred)
  loop for each candidate combo (term, billingPlan)
    AzureSPProber->>AzureSPProber: probeCombo(term, billingPlan)
    AzureSPProber->>client: ValidatePurchase(SavingsPlanPurchaseValidateRequest)
    client-->>response: RPClientValidatePurchaseResponse
    AzureSPProber->>AzureSPProber: check per-benefit Valid flags
    AzureSPProber->>AzureSPProber: if any invalid, skip combo
  end
  AzureSPProber-->>Caller: []Combo with accepted combinations or error

Estimated code review effort

🎯 3 (Moderate) | ⏱️ ~25 minutes

Possibly related PRs

LeanerCloud/CUDly#592: Implemented the Azure Savings Plans provider client and service dispatch; this PR adds the corresponding commitmentopts probe equivalent using the same Azure SDK ValidatePurchase API and armbillingbenefits module.
LeanerCloud/CUDly#63: Both PRs address the savingsplans service identifier; this PR's Azure prober hardcodes Service() to return savingsplans to match the frontend commitment config key.

Suggested labels

priority/p2, severity/medium, urgency/this-quarter

Poem

🐰 Azure probes flutter in, term by term so bright,
Validating plans with ValidatePurchase's might,
Upfront or monthly, each combo we test,
A prober's quest to find the very best!

🚥 Pre-merge checks | ✅ 4 | ❌ 1

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Check name	Status	Explanation	Resolution
Docstring Coverage	⚠️ Warning	Docstring coverage is 55.56% which is insufficient. The required threshold is 80.00%.	Write docstrings for the functions missing them to satisfy the coverage threshold.

✅ Passed checks (4 passed)

Check name	Status	Explanation
Description Check	✅ Passed	Check skipped - CodeRabbit’s high-level summary is enabled.
Title check	✅ Passed	The title clearly and concisely summarizes the main change: adding a probe for Azure Savings Plans offerings for live validation.
Linked Issues check	✅ Passed	The PR implements all coding requirements from issue `#659`: a Savings Plans prober for Azure with live validation via the API, achieving parity with the existing AWS probe.
Out of Scope Changes check	✅ Passed	All changes are directly related to implementing the Azure Savings Plans probe (go.mod dependency update, prober implementation, and comprehensive tests), with no unrelated modifications.

_{✏️ Tip: You can configure your own custom pre-merge checks in the settings.}

✨ Finishing Touches

📝 Generate docstrings

Create stacked PR
Commit on current branch

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

Create PR with unit tests
Commit unit tests in branch feat/659-azure-sp-probe-live

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands and usage tips.}

Uh oh!

Conversation

cristim commented May 25, 2026 • edited by coderabbitai Bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Design

Files

Interface duplication note

Deps

Tests

Summary by CodeRabbit

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Walkthrough

Changes

Sequence Diagram

Estimated code review effort

Possibly related PRs

Suggested labels

Poem

❌ Failed checks (1 warning)

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

coderabbitai Bot commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 26, 2026

Uh oh!

cristim commented May 25, 2026 •

edited by coderabbitai Bot

Loading

coderabbitai Bot commented May 25, 2026 •

edited

Loading