Bug 1640631

Summary: User ID for Service Retirement Task Changes During Retires When First Retirement Fails
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine Reporter: Satoe Imaishi <simaishi>
Component: AutomateAssignee: drew uhlmann <duhlmann>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Dmitry Misharov <dmisharo>
Severity: high Docs Contact: Red Hat CloudForms Documentation <cloudforms-docs>
Priority: high    
Version: 5.9.0CC: bwoolf, dmetzger, dmisharo, duhlmann, mkanoor, obarenbo, rovalent, smallamp, tfitzger
Target Milestone: GAKeywords: ZStream
Target Release: 5.9.6   
Hardware: Unspecified   
OS: Unspecified   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: 5.9.6.0 Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of: 1618530 Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-12-13 15:15:25 UTC Type: ---
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: 1618530    
Bug Blocks: 1622587    

Comment 2 drew uhlmann 2018-10-23 21:56:46 UTC
https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/pull/18106

Comment 3 Dmitry Misharov 2018-11-12 16:07:02 UTC
I followed the steps from here https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1618530#c16 and I can see such message during the retirement:
[----] I, [2018-11-12T05:49:38.299951 #15155:b2f124]  INFO -- : MIQ(MiqEvent#process_evm_event) target = [#<Service id: 5, name: "Test-20181112-043955", description: "", guid: "43aadeb4-c691-494a-94cb-91542bc192c
0", type: nil, service_template_id: 4, options: {:dialog=>{"dialog_text_box_1_1"=>"qwfr"}}, display: true, created_at: "2018-11-12 09:39:49", updated_at: "2018-11-12 10:49:32", evm_owner_id: 1, miq_group_id: 2, r
etired: false, retires_on: "2018-11-12 10:42:08", retirement_warn: 0, retirement_last_warn: "2018-11-12 10:49:32", retirement_state: "initializing", retirement_requester: "#<User:0x0000000013cfd560>", tenant_id:
1, ancestry: nil, initiator: "user">]

it seems "retirement_requester" shows something wrong, because in 5.10 it shows a correct user id.

Comment 4 drew uhlmann 2018-11-12 16:16:42 UTC
Thanks for verifying this on latest, Dmitry. I wouldn't have expected it to work on 5.9 anything yet because the fix is going to have to be a little different.

Comment 5 drew uhlmann 2018-11-12 19:46:59 UTC
So I believe that the code that already got merged to the g branch is sufficient to fix this issue on g. I do however still think that comment 3 is a different bug. 

In order to verify this on g, you will simply need to set a service to retire in the future and then, when the retirement is complete, check that the retirement initiator is anything but "system".

This was a different verification process than the same bug on master, because master included api changes that g didn't.

Comment 6 Dmitry Misharov 2018-11-13 07:48:40 UTC
(In reply to drew uhlmann from comment #5)
> So I believe that the code that already got merged to the g branch is
> sufficient to fix this issue on g. I do however still think that comment 3
> is a different bug. 
> 
> In order to verify this on g, you will simply need to set a service to
> retire in the future and then, when the retirement is complete, check that
> the retirement initiator is anything but "system".
> 
> This was a different verification process than the same bug on master,
> because master included api changes that g didn't.

I created a separate BZ https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1649219. This issue is closed as verified in 5.9.6.0.20181105224828_652732b.

Comment 9 errata-xmlrpc 2018-12-13 15:15:25 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:3816