Bug 1382150 - Error on viewing storage from a SCVMM provider
Summary: Error on viewing storage from a SCVMM provider
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED WORKSFORME
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine
Classification: Red Hat
Component: UI - OPS
Version: 5.6.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
high
high
Target Milestone: GA
: cfme-future
Assignee: Jozef Zigmund
QA Contact: Jeff Teehan
URL:
Whiteboard: provider:scvmm:datastore
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-10-05 21:35 UTC by Jerome Marc
Modified: 2016-11-16 21:24 UTC (History)
7 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2016-11-16 21:24:51 UTC
Category: ---
Cloudforms Team: ---
Target Upstream Version:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
Unexpected error encountered - no route matches (213.75 KB, image/png)
2016-10-05 21:35 UTC, Jerome Marc
no flags Details

Description Jerome Marc 2016-10-05 21:35:14 UTC
Created attachment 1207696 [details]
Unexpected error encountered - no route matches

Description of problem:
Error when trying to view any storage from relationships in the SCVMM provider view (see attached).

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
5.6.2.1.20160922130607_92d5b5e

How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Click on SCVMM provider
2. From the relationship box, click on Storage - All Managed Datastores will be displayed
3. Click on any of the storage 

Actual results:
Unexpected error encountered
Error text:
No route matches {:action=>"10000000000004?display=storages", :controller=>"ems_infra", :id=>"10r10"} [storage/show] 

Expected results:
The storage view should be displayed without error

Additional info:
The storage view can be accessed successfully from 'Compute > Infrastructure > Datastores' without error

Comment 2 Jeff Teehan 2016-11-09 00:35:24 UTC
I'll take the QE contact

Comment 3 Jozef Zigmund 2016-11-16 15:26:57 UTC
I was not able to reproduce the bug (tried on master / darga/ 5.6.2.1.20160922130607_92d5b5e / 5.6.3.0.20161108115816_66df924) Could you please verify it? If you are still able to reproduce it, can you provide any additional info?

Comment 4 Jerome Marc 2016-11-16 17:32:43 UTC
I have tested on 5.6.2.2 and the exception does not occur. It must have been fixed in the latest errata.

All good this BZ can be closed.


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