Bug 1290485 - validate_request for cloud does not include support for flavors
Summary: validate_request for cloud does not include support for flavors
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Automate
Version: 5.4.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
medium
medium
Target Milestone: GA
: 5.7.0
Assignee: William Fitzgerald
QA Contact: Shveta
URL:
Whiteboard: service:catalog
Depends On:
Blocks: 1375311
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2015-12-10 16:17 UTC by Jeffrey Cutter
Modified: 2017-01-12 04:55 UTC (History)
8 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 5.7.0.1
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1375311 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-01-11 19:52:44 UTC
Category: ---
Cloudforms Team: ---
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
zip including before, after, and patch (4.70 KB, application/zip)
2015-12-10 16:17 UTC, Jeffrey Cutter
no flags Details

Description Jeffrey Cutter 2015-12-10 16:17:29 UTC
Created attachment 1104406 [details]
zip including before, after, and patch

Description of problem:

/ ManageIQ / Cloud / VM / Provisioning / StateMachines / ProvisionRequestApproval / validate_request not working for requiring approval when flavors are used.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Edit the Default instance in the same location and add low limits for max_cpu and max_memory. 
2. Provision a cloud instance that exceeds those values.
3. Note that approval is not required.

Actual results:

Request provisions without requiring approval.

Expected results:

Request should be sent for approval.

Additional info:

See attachment with before and after and patch which seems to resolve the issue.

Comment 3 CFME Bot 2016-09-09 21:20:58 UTC
New commit detected on ManageIQ/manageiq/master:
https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/commit/d32b0a7c7089104112221f9c68ad883a3bc11c84

commit d32b0a7c7089104112221f9c68ad883a3bc11c84
Author:     Tina Fitzgerald <tfitzger>
AuthorDate: Fri Aug 5 11:10:59 2016 -0400
Commit:     Tina Fitzgerald <tfitzger>
CommitDate: Fri Sep 9 16:11:55 2016 -0400

    Automate - Fixed issue with cloud validate_request method not getting
    cloud flavor values properly. Added tests.
    
    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290485

 .../__methods__/validate_request.rb                | 34 +++++++----
 .../method_validation/validate_request_spec.rb     | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 spec/automation/unit/method_validation/validate_request_spec.rb

Comment 4 CFME Bot 2016-09-09 22:30:54 UTC
New commit detected on ManageIQ/manageiq/darga:
https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/commit/7f744d40d2e6a4fee37a540861e00385046ecd9b

commit 7f744d40d2e6a4fee37a540861e00385046ecd9b
Author:     Greg McCullough <gmccullo>
AuthorDate: Fri Sep 9 17:16:06 2016 -0400
Commit:     Oleg Barenboim <chessbyte>
CommitDate: Fri Sep 9 18:29:07 2016 -0400

    Merge pull request #10281 from tinaafitz/validate_request
    
    Automate - Fixed issue with cloud validate_request method.
    (cherry picked from commit 4634e191ef92ab73cad3ff4a74be6c9a7afc3ba8)
    
    https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1290485

 .../__methods__/validate_request.rb                | 34 +++++++----
 .../method_validation/validate_request_spec.rb     | 69 ++++++++++++++++++++++
 2 files changed, 93 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 spec/automation/unit/method_validation/validate_request_spec.rb

Comment 6 Shveta 2016-09-21 19:54:06 UTC
Hi Tina ,

Followed the exact same steps as you mentioned in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1375311.
But request gets approved.
Please check .Request 18 , 19

https://10.8.199.228

Comment 7 William Fitzgerald 2016-09-21 21:38:09 UTC
Shveta,

I re-ran one of your provisioning requests (#20) called billy_testagaininstac.  I changed number of instances = 2 and that caused the request to not be auto-approved.  I think the previous one was asking for 1 and the request limit was at 1 so it was auto-approved.

Hope this helps ...

Thanks

Billy

Comment 8 Shveta 2016-09-21 22:02:52 UTC
Verified in 5.7.0.0.20160906172503_12f65cb


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