Bug 1039996

Summary:	domain member role "admin" is unable to request additional storage
Product:	OpenShift Online	Reporter:	Oleg Fayans <ofayans>
Component:	Pod	Assignee:	Abhishek Gupta <abhgupta>
Status:	CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE	QA Contact:	libra bugs <libra-bugs>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	1.x	CC:	amarecek, xtian
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Clones:	1066891 (view as bug list)		Environment:
Last Closed:	2014-03-12 03:05:51 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	1066891

Description Oleg Fayans 2013-12-10 13:30:40 UTC

Description of problem:

When I add a member to my domain with "admin" role and set max untracked storage for this usage to 50G on the broker, then this user should be able to request additional gear storage space.
Now, when this member requests additional storage with rhc client, he gets the error: "You are not allowed to request additional gear storage"

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
devenv build number ami-95e6cafc

How reproducible:

always


Steps to Reproduce:
1. Register 2 users. 
2. as user1 create a domain and a "python-2.7,postgresql-9.2" app
3. add user2 as "admin" member of the domain
4. set maximum untracked storage for this user to 50G
oo-admin-ctl-user --setmaxuntrackedstorage 4 -l user2
5. switch to the second user (rhc setup -l user2)
6. request additional storage: 
rhc cartridge storage -c postgresql-9.2 -a app1 --add 2GB -l user2


Actual results:
You are not allowed to request additional gear storage

Expected results:
success

Additional info:

Comment 1 Abhishek Gupta 2013-12-10 20:42:26 UTC

This is an invalid bug. Assigning it to ON_QA for QE to fix their test case.

user1 does not have the capability and hence additional storage cannot be added to an application that is owned by user1. Since user1 is the one on the hook for paying the cost of the additional storage, he needs to have the capability to begin with. Consider this: if user2 is later removed from the domain, what happens to the additional storage?

Comment 3 zhaozhanqi 2013-12-11 07:54:34 UTC

Added one case for this.