Bug 534953 (RHQ-169)
Summary: | stale template name in session scope causes clicking on Create Resource button to fail with "IllegalStateException: A template named 'XXX' does not exist for ResourceType YYY" error | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | [Other] RHQ Project | Reporter: | Ian Springer <ian.springer> |
Component: | Inventory | Assignee: | Lukas Krejci <lkrejci> |
Status: | CLOSED NEXTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Jeff Weiss <jweiss> |
Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |
Priority: | medium | ||
Version: | 0.1 | CC: | ccrouch, dajohnso |
Target Milestone: | --- | Keywords: | SubBug |
Target Release: | --- | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | All | ||
URL: | http://jira.rhq-project.org/browse/RHQ-169 | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Fixed In Version: | 1.2 | Doc Type: | Bug Fix |
Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |
Clone Of: | Environment: | ||
Last Closed: | Type: | --- | |
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: | 535213 | ||
Bug Blocks: | 536330 |
Description
Ian Springer
2008-03-20 22:04:00 UTC
This issue sounds related to "conversation-scope" issues setting for 1.1 target for investigation. ian, how easy is it to reproduce this? off the top of my head i would guess that a single user, within the same login session, must attempt to manually create resources of two different types. is that it, or can it be reproduced even more simply? Charles, yep, it's yet another issue caused by the fact that we use session scope to store Configurations being edited. The best solution will come once we switch over to Seam and start utilizing conversation scope. I haven't looked into whether there's an easy workaround that can be done in the mean time. Joseph, yep, reproducing is pretty easy - just follow the instructions in this issue's Description. another issue of session-scoped staleness, pushing to 1.2 for proper fix via conversational-level caching. I think this issue by itself is fixed, but to really test it, RHQ-1933 should be solved first. i believe this was resolved with the work done for RHQ-1933 I'm pretty sure this no longer occurs. Will reopen if I see it again. rev3856 This bug was previously known as http://jira.rhq-project.org/browse/RHQ-169 This bug is related to RHQ-220 |