Bug 1274095
Summary: | [RFE] Deleting object does not delete dependent objects | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine | Reporter: | Thom Carlin <tcarlin> |
Component: | Appliance | Assignee: | John Hardy <jhardy> |
Status: | CLOSED WONTFIX | QA Contact: | Dave Johnson <dajohnso> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 5.4.0 | CC: | abellott, greartes, gtanzill, hkataria, jfrey, jhardy, mpovolny, obarenbo, slukasik, tcarlin |
Target Milestone: | GA | Keywords: | FutureFeature |
Target Release: | cfme-future | ||
Hardware: | Unspecified | ||
OS: | Unspecified | ||
Whiteboard: | database:retest | ||
Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Enhancement | |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | 2017-08-28 15:03:46 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: | |
Embargoed: |
Description
Thom Carlin
2015-10-21 22:23:53 UTC
Gregg, can you verify the results from comment #3? Is there a purge process that should be cleaning up orphaned objects as noted? If so, how does it get scheduled? Maybe this is just a doc bug? Hello Thom, thanks for report. The behavior has been always this way. (Since 651e218558ce74b45d775a777c4afbea21aa664a, to be more specific). I am trying to make my mind if this is correct or not. One can hardly tell. On the one hand, when someone deletes a provider, s/he may want to purge all the data and perhaps start over. I don't see what is the use-case of removing the provider, while keeping the (some) of the data read-only. On the other hand, there is a value in keeping the data in. - There is a special state "orphaned" for Vms(or templates) that have no provider. At this state the UI allows you to review the valuable data you may have. I guess this might have been requested by users in past. - When you re-create the provider the VMs(and templates) that has been orphaned are correctly discovered and assigned to the re-crated provider. - All the control buttons are grey on orphaned entities, that leads me to think we have extra logic for this state. Gregg, what are your thoughts? I imagine you may have much better view into what might be in the users heads when they hit the delete provider button. Hi, I my case i wanted to start over. I should be faster to delete the provider than to delete all tags from all objects. Also, in that case, the vcenter was migrated from 5 to 6 (i found out after the fact) and i deleted the provider (vcenter5) and re-add it (vcenter6) and found, to my surprise that the tags survived. So i had to re-tag everything. :-/ But since vcenter changed from v5 to v6 (same hosts and datastores) i really expected that deleting the provider would delete permanently its objects. (one can always re-add it). Cheers. This bug has been open for more than a year and is assigned to an older release of CloudForms. If you would like to keep this Bugzilla open and if the issue is still present in the latest version of the product, please file a new Bugzilla which will be added and assigned to the latest release of CloudForms. |