Bug 1406741

Summary: pods status is shown as "phase" in the cfme properties table
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine Reporter: Dafna Ron <dron>
Component: UI - OPSAssignee: Ari Zellner <azellner>
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE QA Contact: Einat Pacifici <epacific>
Severity: medium Docs Contact:
Priority: unspecified    
Version: 5.7.0CC: azellner, fsimonce, hkataria, jhardy, mpovolny, obarenbo
Target Milestone: GAKeywords: TestOnly
Target Release: 5.10.0   
Hardware: x86_64   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard: container
Fixed In Version: 5.10.0.0 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 1517947 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-06-21 21:13:33 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: CFME Core Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1517947    
Attachments:
Description Flags
screen shot none

Description Dafna Ron 2016-12-21 11:23:54 UTC 
Description of problem:

I am comparing the information we are getting from openshift on the pods and the properties table in cfme and I was unclear on why we are using the word "Phase" to describe the pod status. 
opening a bugs so we can either change or document the reason in case it comes up in future if customers wish to create scripting which would collaborate between lower and upper levels. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

cfme-5.7.0.17-1.el7cf.x86_64

How reproducible:

100$

Steps to Reproduce:
1. add a provider with pods to cfme 
2. select a pod and compare the fields to the "describe" commands in openshift 
3.

Actual results:

pod status is showed as "Status" in openshift and shown as "Phase" in cfme. 

Expected results:

I think there should be alignments. also not sure why change status to phase to begin with since status is such a known phrase

Additional info:


Name:		cloudforms-1-lca4h
Namespace:	dafna
Node:		10.8.218.9/10.8.218.9
Start Time:	Wed, 21 Dec 2016 05:30:44 -0500
Labels:		deployment=cloudforms-1,deploymentconfig=cloudforms,name=cloudforms
Status:		Running
IP:		10.1.1.3
Controllers:	ReplicationController/cloudforms-1
Comment 1 Dafna Ron 2016-12-21 11:35:59 UTC 
Created attachment 1234303 [details]
screen shot

To add, I exported the pod yaml and there is a field called "Phase" but in the configuration the phase is actually pending and not running as shown in the cfme. 


[root@smicro-628-b11 manageiq-pods]# oc export pod cloudforms-1-lca4h |grep -i phase
  phase: Pending

see screen shot for same pod.
Comment 3 Federico Simoncelli 2017-01-09 22:56:09 UTC 
(In reply to Dafna Ron from comment #1)
> 
> To add, I exported the pod yaml and there is a field called "Phase" but in
> the configuration the phase is actually pending and not running as shown in
> the cfme. 

Dafna what is the "configuration"? I assume you refer to the pod definition here:

> [root@smicro-628-b11 manageiq-pods]# oc export pod cloudforms-1-lca4h |grep
> -i phase
>   phase: Pending
> 
> see screen shot for same pod.


Ari, let's investigate what's the logic behind the status returned by "oc describe" (is it taking the value from Phase or somewhere else?) so that we can do an informed decision on some aspects.

In CFME the field Phase was created to report the Phase field from the OpenShift Pod (not the "Status" reported by "oc describe"... even if it happens to have similar values).

As usual there could be some discrepancies between the Pod in OpenShift and the information reported in CFME that are updated to the last refresh.

If triggering a refresh aligns the Phase values (oc export pod == CFME UI) then it's NOTABUG.

Ari please work with Dafna to check that the refresh indeed works correctly here for the Phase (and let's investigate the status reported by oc describe as mentioned above).
Comment 4 Dafna Ron 2017-01-10 10:39:22 UTC 
sorry. yes, I meant that in the export the phase field is not the one that is reported in the UI since it is reported as pending.
Comment 5 Federico Simoncelli 2017-01-23 10:38:49 UTC 
Still under discussion (and needinfo), not z-stream for now.
Comment 6 Ari Zellner 2017-11-26 10:54:22 UTC 
changed phase to status
Upstream PR: https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq-ui-classic/pull/2825