Bug 1352857
| Summary: | image upload: informative message is required when disk's entered values are not valid | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [oVirt] ovirt-engine | Reporter: | Amit Aviram <aaviram> | ||||||
| Component: | Frontend.WebAdmin | Assignee: | Daniel Erez <derez> | ||||||
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Natalie Gavrielov <ngavrilo> | ||||||
| Severity: | medium | Docs Contact: | |||||||
| Priority: | unspecified | ||||||||
| Version: | future | CC: | aaviram, acanan, amureini, bugs, derez, gklein, ngavrilo, tnisan | ||||||
| Target Milestone: | ovirt-4.0.4 | Flags: | rule-engine:
ovirt-4.0.z+
rule-engine: planning_ack+ rule-engine: devel_ack+ acanan: testing_ack+ |
||||||
| Target Release: | 4.0.4 | ||||||||
| Hardware: | Unspecified | ||||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | If docs needed, set a value | |||||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||
| Last Closed: | 2016-09-26 12:36:28 UTC | Type: | Bug | ||||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||||
| oVirt Team: | Storage | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||
|
Description
Amit Aviram
2016-07-05 09:41:29 UTC
*** Bug 1352897 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. *** Hi Amit / Erez, I performed the following tests, but I'm not completely sure what is the expected result for each of these scenarios.. can you please confirm/refute if this is the desired behaviour? Verification: 1 GB disk size: Raw, Preallocated, block type: "this field must contain an integer number between 5 and 8192" Raw, Preallocated, file type: "this field must contain an integer number greater than or equal to 5" Raw, Thin provision, block type: Unavailable, changes image type to QCOW and shows "this field must contain an integer number between 5 and 8192" Raw, Thin provision, file type: "This field must contain an integer number greater than or equal to 5" QCOW2 , Preallocated, block type: Unavailable - changes image type to Raw QCOW2 , Preallocated, file type: Unavailable - changes image type to Raw QCOW2, Thin provision, block type: "this field must contain an integer number between 3 8192" QCOW2, Thin provision, file type: Unavailable - changes image type to Raw Verification: 1000 GB disk size: Raw, Preallocated, block type: Error while executing action: Cannot add Virtual Disk. Low disk space on Storage Domain iscsi. Raw, Preallocated, file type: Error while executing action: Cannot add Virtual Disk. Low disk space on Storage Domain rhev-402-nat. Raw, Thin provision, block type: Unavailable, changes image type to QCOW and shows, starts upload Raw, Thin provision, file type: starts upload QCOW2 , Preallocated, block type: Unavailable - changes image type to Raw QCOW2 , Preallocated, file type: Unavailable - changes image type to Raw QCOW2, Thin provision, block type: starts upload QCOW2, Thin provision, file type: Unavailable - changes image type to Raw The bug is about having these messages at the first place, if they appeared- the bug can be verified. BTW, all of these errors are generated while trying to add the specified disk- so if there is a wrong message, it is another bug. (it will also happen when adding a new disk) Thanks (In reply to Amit Aviram from comment #3) > The bug is about having these messages at the first place, if they appeared- > the bug can be verified. > > BTW, all of these errors are generated while trying to add the specified > disk- so if there is a wrong message, it is another bug. (it will also > happen when adding a new disk) > > Thanks IMHO I don't think you can have one without the other.. it's like saying you issue an error message, but the fact it is out of context is a totally different issue.. and it's not - every case should have a suitable message, the headline of this bug suggests that. In this bug, there is no sufficient information in order to verify it. So, I've tested all the possibilities, but I'm still missing the expected result. (In reply to Natalie Gavrielov from comment #4) > (In reply to Amit Aviram from comment #3) > > The bug is about having these messages at the first place, if they appeared- > > the bug can be verified. > > > > BTW, all of these errors are generated while trying to add the specified > > disk- so if there is a wrong message, it is another bug. (it will also > > happen when adding a new disk) > > > > Thanks > > IMHO > > I don't think you can have one without the other.. > it's like saying you issue an error message, but the fact it is out of > context is a totally different issue.. and it's not - every case should have > a suitable message, the headline of this bug suggests that. > In this bug, there is no sufficient information in order to verify it. > So, I've tested all the possibilities, but I'm still missing the expected > result. (In reply to Natalie Gavrielov from comment #4) > (In reply to Amit Aviram from comment #3) > > The bug is about having these messages at the first place, if they appeared- > > the bug can be verified. > > > > BTW, all of these errors are generated while trying to add the specified > > disk- so if there is a wrong message, it is another bug. (it will also > > happen when adding a new disk) > > > > Thanks > > IMHO > > I don't think you can have one without the other.. > it's like saying you issue an error message, but the fact it is out of > context is a totally different issue.. and it's not - every case should have > a suitable message, the headline of this bug suggests that. You right, I changed the headline so it will not demand "proper" message, as this is too generic to ask. > In this bug, there is no sufficient information in order to verify it. > So, I've tested all the possibilities, but I'm still missing the expected > result. Scenario tested: 1. Go to "disks" tab 2. Choose to "upload" 3. Enter values that should fail verification: Size (GB): 555555 Alias: !@#$%V or Size (GB): 55555555 Alias: ~ Actual result: Uncaught exception occurred. Please try reloading the page. Details: Exception caught: Index: 0, Size: 0 Please have your administrator check the UI logs Target release should be placed once a package build is known to fix a issue. Since this bug is not modified, the target version has been reset. Please use target milestone to plan a fix for a oVirt release. used 4.0.2-5: rhevm-4.0.2.3-0.1.el7ev.noarch ovirt-imageio-common-0.3.0-0.el7ev.noarch ovirt-imageio-proxy-0.3.0-0.el7ev.noarch vdsm-4.18.9-1.el7ev.x86_64 ovirt-imageio-daemon-0.3.0-0.el7ev.noarch Target release should be placed once a package build is known to fix a issue. Since this bug is not modified, the target version has been reset. Please use target milestone to plan a fix for a oVirt release. Created attachment 1186871 [details]
snapshot
Can't seem to reproduce the issue in my environment. * Is it 100% reproducible? * Can you please attach the UI logs (from developer tools console). Created attachment 1186974 [details]
ui log
Verified: Used the scenario described in the comment #0. (This is like the only scenario that triggers this error.. couldn't find any other) Got the following dialogue: Operation canceled Error while executing action: Cannot add Virtual Disk. Low disk space on Storage Domain iscsi2 Builds used: rhevm-4.0.4-0.1.el7ev.noarch vdsm-4.18.12-1.el7ev.x86_64 ovirt-imageio-proxy-0.3.0-0.el7ev.noarch ovirt-imageio-common-0.3.0-0.el7ev.noarch ovirt-imageio-daemon-0.3.0-0.el7ev.noarch |