Bug 1341637

Summary: critical cross of utilization threshold
Product: [Red Hat Storage] Red Hat Storage Console Reporter: Lubos Trilety <ltrilety>
Component: unclassifiedAssignee: Darshan <dnarayan>
Status: CLOSED WONTFIX QA Contact: sds-qe-bugs
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 2CC: mcarrano, nthomas, sankarshan, vsarmila
Target Milestone: ---   
Target Release: 3   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-03-23 04:11:19 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:
Attachments:
Description Flags
event severity
none
event details
none
warning event none

Description Lubos Trilety 2016-06-01 11:45:07 UTC 
Description of problem:
Event for critical crossing of utilization events has too general message from which it's not clear that critical threshold was crossed.
e.g.
var-lib-ceph-osd-testcluster-2 MountPoint utilization crossed threshold on: <hostname>

Moreover they looks like critical and they are filtered as critical, but there's 'Major' as their severity and in details there's wrong icon too.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
rhscon-core-0.0.21-1.el7scon.x86_64
rhscon-ceph-0.0.20-1.el7scon.x86_64
rhscon-ui-0.0.34-1.el7scon.noarch

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Create some pool
2. Add data so critical threshold is crossed
3. Look for events

Actual results:
An event with too general message and bad severity is created.

Expected results:
Correct event is created.

Additional info:
Comment 1 Lubos Trilety 2016-06-01 11:45:33 UTC 
Created attachment 1163601 [details]
event details
Comment 2 Matt Carrano 2016-06-07 21:41:51 UTC 
We recommend that messages of this type use the following syntax:

<object name> on <cluster> is <condition>.  Current <attribute> is <value>.
For example, if an OSD is reporting a near full condition, the message would read: 
“osd.1 on ClusterX is near full.  Current utilization is 88.5%.”

This has been clarified in the Tasks & Events design document here: https://docs.google.com/a/redhat.com/presentation/d/1G14y5Vu6fNgf7ePNOe932yAA6LAFfyiNfN0t8fCVUv8/edit?usp=sharing  See slide 20.
Comment 3 Nishanth Thomas 2016-06-21 06:49:14 UTC 
Even though you have many severity levels in back-end, UI group them into two categories, critical and warning. Critical will group critical and major severities, Warning has warning and minor severity alarms. So what you are seeing on the UI is as expected.

Regarding messages, is it something we can push out of 2.0 ??
Comment 4 Lubos Trilety 2016-06-21 14:31:03 UTC 
(In reply to Nishanth Thomas from comment #3)
> Even though you have many severity levels in back-end, UI group them into
> two categories, critical and warning. Critical will group critical and major
> severities, Warning has warning and minor severity alarms. So what you are
> seeing on the UI is as expected.
> 

OK, makes sense. Well the first part about critical and major. However there was another part that on details page there's status icon too, but for major severity it shows pficon-warning-triangle-o and for some events with warning severity it doesn't show any icon at all on details page.
See attached screen-shots.

> Regarding messages, is it something we can push out of 2.0 ??

I don't think it's a big issue so from my point of view that's fine.
Comment 5 Lubos Trilety 2016-06-21 14:35:20 UTC 
Created attachment 1170303 [details]
warning event

Event with warning severity
Comment 6 Lubos Trilety 2016-06-21 14:48:15 UTC 
I created a new BZ 1348603 for bad details page. Let's have this one only for the message when threshold is crossed.
Comment 7 Nishanth Thomas 2016-06-23 14:03:12 UTC 
Per discussion with JeffA, this is a nice to have and doesn't have any impact on the functionality. So moving to 3.0