Red Hat Satellite engineering is moving the tracking of its product development work on Satellite to Red Hat Jira (issues.redhat.com). If you're a Red Hat customer, please continue to file support cases via the Red Hat customer portal. If you're not, please head to the "Satellite project" in Red Hat Jira and file new tickets here. Individual Bugzilla bugs will be migrated starting at the end of May. If you cannot log in to RH Jira, please consult article #7032570. That failing, please send an e-mail to the RH Jira admins at rh-issues@redhat.com to troubleshoot your issue as a user management inquiry. The email creates a ServiceNow ticket with Red Hat. Individual Bugzilla bugs that are migrated will be moved to status "CLOSED", resolution "MIGRATED", and set with "MigratedToJIRA" in "Keywords". The link to the successor Jira issue will be found under "Links", have a little "two-footprint" icon next to it, and direct you to the "Satellite project" in Red Hat Jira (issue links are of type "https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-XXXX", where "X" is a digit). This same link will be available in a blue banner at the top of the page informing you that that bug has been migrated.
Bug 1123965 - refactor with_taxonomy_scope to optimize SQL
Summary: refactor with_taxonomy_scope to optimize SQL
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED NOTABUG
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Satellite
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Provisioning
Version: 6.0.4
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
unspecified
unspecified
Target Milestone: Unspecified
Assignee: Katello Bug Bin
QA Contact: Katello QA List
URL: http://projects.theforeman.org/issues...
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2014-07-28 18:17 UTC by Eric Helms
Modified: 2016-04-22 16:01 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2014-07-28 18:23:18 UTC
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Foreman Issue Tracker 4329 0 None None None 2016-04-22 16:01:50 UTC

Description Eric Helms 2014-07-28 18:17:41 UTC
per Marek's comment on PR #1105

so we find all records within specific location, the find the same for specific organization and then combine these ids which we use in third query? sounds like work for SQL instead of ruby? I understand it's not that easy using ancestry but this does not feel right to me, what do others think?

Comment 1 Eric Helms 2014-07-28 18:17:42 UTC
Created from redmine issue http://projects.theforeman.org/issues/4329


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.