Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||search bar code for availability querying looks broken|
|Product:||[Other] RHQ Project||Reporter:||John Mazzitelli <mazz>|
|Component:||SearchBar||Assignee:||John Mazzitelli <mazz>|
|Status:||CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE||QA Contact:||Mike Foley <mfoley>|
|Target Release:||JON 3.1.0|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Bug Fix|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2013-09-03 11:13:42 EDT||Type:||Bug|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:||820716|
Description John Mazzitelli 2012-05-25 12:23:23 EDT
+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #820716 +++ see this: org.rhq.enterprise.server.search.translation.GroupSearchTranslator.getSearchFragment specifically this code: return new SearchFragment( // SearchFragment.Type.PRIMARY_KEY_SUBQUERY, "SELECT rg.id" // + " FROM ResourceGroup rg " // + " WHERE ( SELECT AVG( iavail.availabilityType ) " // + " FROM rg.explicitResources ires " // + " JOIN ires.currentAvailability iavail ) " + numericAvailabilityFragment); We can't do AVG on avail type anymore - since we have more than 0 (down) and 1 (up). We have 2 (unknown) and 3 (disabled) so averaging won't give us what we are expecting. I think this is code that lets us use "availability" in the search bar to search for availability=UP and availabiltiy=DOWN (and whatever else we allow.. MIXED??? DISABLED??? UNKNOWN???) We need to double check the search bar ability to query on avaialbilty and get it to work for groups.
Comment 1 John Mazzitelli 2012-05-25 12:24:46 EDT
Need to cherry pick to the release branch the following: ** git commit to master f4c13d0 - this is some new unit tests for the availability keyword in the search expression ** git commit to master: 6641616 - when viewing group lists, in the search bar, you can now specify "availability=down" for example and the only groups you will see are those groups where all members are down. Same with "up" and "disabled". This also supports != as before.
Comment 2 John Mazzitelli 2012-05-25 12:44:51 EDT
two cherry picks to release/3.1.x branch: 310e054924f52685904ab841d557c2f1b58aed24 d9f41878fbfff7659e62a82a7f7195142e11693d the latter caused a conflict so I had to manually fix it. see https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=820432#c4 from bug 820432
Comment 3 John Mazzitelli 2012-05-25 14:24:55 EDT
fix a problem with conflicts during the cherry pick: release/jon3.1.x commit: b3866debd52593cce9f9bf10bd17df8e3b3da0bc
Comment 4 Sunil Kondkar 2012-05-30 07:04:52 EDT
Verified on Version: 3.1.0.CR1 Build Number: 4bc4270:1b85993 Verified below availabilty search criterias using operators ( = , == , != , !== ) on resources and groups : availability=up availability=down availability=disabled availability=unknown The search results display correct results ( Ex: for "availability=down" , only groups with all members down appear in search results) Observed one issue with groups without members having unknown status. This group appears in every availabilty search result. I filed a new bug#826493 to address this. Marking this bug as verified.
Comment 5 Heiko W. Rupp 2013-09-03 11:13:42 EDT
Bulk closing of old issues in VERIFIED state.