Bug 1812858

Summary:	Satellite Inventory Plugin does not appear to make reports which match yupana's API specification
Product:	Red Hat Satellite	Reporter:	Rich Jerrido <rjerrido>
Component:	RH Cloud - Inventory	Assignee:	Shimon Shtein <sshtein>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	Mirek Długosz <mzalewsk>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	6.7.0	CC:	bkearney, egolov, jjeffers, kholdawa, molasaga, mzalewsk, pakamble
Target Milestone:	6.8.0	Keywords:	Triaged
Target Release:	Unused
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	tfm-rubygem-foreman_rh_cloud-1.0.6	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:
Clones:	1862250 (view as bug list)		Environment:
Last Closed:	2020-10-27 13:00:31 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:
Bug Depends On:	1821752, 1821756, 1826678, 1826714
Bug Blocks:

Description Rich Jerrido 2020-03-12 11:02:29 UTC

Description of problem:


While troubleshooting a user not seeing data in Subscription Watch, we noticed that the metadata.json does not appear to meet Yupana's specification. 

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
tfm-rubygem-foreman_inventory_upload-1.0.2-0.1.el7sat.noarch.rpm

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Download report using the Satellite plugin
2. inspect metadata.json and compare to the Yupana API spec
3.

Actual results:


Expected results:


Additional info:

Comment 5 Shimon Shtein 2020-03-29 15:40:15 UTC

*** Bug 1817553 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 6 Sanket Jagtap 2020-04-16 14:08:49 UTC

*** Bug 1823396 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 7 Shimon Shtein 2020-04-16 14:58:49 UTC

*** Bug 1823396 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 8 Kevan Holdaway 2020-04-20 13:22:19 UTC

Also, this writeup confuses different layers.  Ingress does not reject anything or validate anything.

Possible issues include:
1. Yupana rejects tar.gz format because you did not conform to syntax (see https://github.com/quipucords/yupana#-formatting-data-for-yupana-without-qpc).  However, this has nothing to do with subscription_status
2. HBI may reject a host (not the tar.gz) based on invalid syntax.  Yupana does NOT validate hosts.  HBI validates hosts.   So likely HBI didn't like subscription_status

I do not think these issues are the same.

- This bug relates to yupana validation
- Bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823396 relates to HBI validate

I do not think this is a duplicate of https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1823396 based on the fact the validation failures are in different services.

Comment 12 James Jeffers 2020-08-03 14:55:18 UTC

*** Bug 1862250 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 15 errata-xmlrpc 2020-10-27 13:00:31 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 (Important: Satellite 6.8 release), 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-2020:4366