Bug 1231637

Summary: Static VDBs doesn't get sequenced
Product: [JBoss] JBoss Data Virtualization 6 Reporter: Filip Nguyen <fnguyen>
Component: ModeShapeAssignee: Horia Chiorean <hchiorea>
Severity: urgent Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 6.2.0CC: atangrin, hchiorea, mbaluch
Target Milestone: ER3Keywords: QA-Closed, TestBlocker
Target Release: ---   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-02-10 08:50:36 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:
Description Flags
failing VDB none

Description Filip Nguyen 2015-06-15 06:48:42 UTC
Created attachment 1038795 [details]
failing VDB

Sequencing of the attached VDB fails with:

08:48:04,412 ERROR [org.modeshape.jcr.SequencingRunner] (modeshape-sequencer-6-thread-1) The 'teiid-vdb-sequencer' sequencer of repository 'dv' had an error while processing '/files/QT_Vanilla_Hive_Push.vdb/jcr:content/jcr:data' in workspace 'default' and generating output '/derived/teiid/vdbs/QT_Vanilla_Hive_Push.vdb': javax.jcr.nodetype.ConstraintViolationException: The mandatory property named 'vdb:path' defined in type 'vdb:marker' is missing from the node at '/derived/teiid/vdbs/QT_Vanilla_Hive_Push.vdb/Source.xmi/vdb:markers/vdb:marker'

Comment 2 Horia Chiorean 2015-06-17 07:17:15 UTC
I'm curious why this is a test blocker: yes, it's a bug for this particular VDB, but we have lots of tests where other VDBs are parsed just fine.

Comment 3 Filip Nguyen 2015-06-18 08:41:24 UTC
To my knowledge we do not have tests where static VDBs are parsed.

Comment 4 Horia Chiorean 2015-06-18 09:02:09 UTC
Sorry, by "we" I meant ModeShape unit tests that we're using to test the VDB & Model sequencer.

Comment 5 Filip Nguyen 2015-06-18 12:29:55 UTC
That might mean you use older version of VDB with some attributes missing. In that case I think its good idea to develop (and double check docs) test for these new pieces of information that should be sequenced. Reason being its in the test plan for this release.