Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 1403184
"uninitialized constant MiqException::MiqVolumeBackupCreateError" when creating backup for cloud volume
Last modified: 2018-03-01 08:08:54 EST
Created attachment 1229933 [details] err Description of problem: Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 5.7.0.14 How reproducible: 100% Steps to Reproduce: 1. Navigate to storage->volumes 2. In volume summary page from configuration click on "create backup of this cloud volume 3.Enter backup name and save. Actual results: Error: [uninitialized constant MiqException::MiqVolumeBackupCreateError] displayed in UI. see attached screenshot. Expected results: Additional info: evm.log [----] E, [2016-12-09T06:00:36.920477 #2895:e11130] ERROR -- : MIQ(MiqQueue#deliver) Message id: [42530], Error: [uninitialized constant MiqException::MiqVolumeBackupCreateError] [----] E, [2016-12-09T06:00:36.920776 #2895:e11130] ERROR -- : [NameError]: uninitialized constant MiqException::MiqVolumeBackupCreateError Method:[rescue in deliver] [----] E, [2016-12-09T06:00:36.920879 #2895:e11130] ERROR -- : /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/manageiq/providers/openstack/cloud_manager/cloud_volume.rb:68:in `rescue in backup_create' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/manageiq/providers/openstack/cloud_manager/cloud_volume.rb:61:in `backup_create' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_queue.rb:347:in `block in deliver' /opt/rh/rh-ruby23/root/usr/share/ruby/timeout.rb:91:in `block in timeout' /opt/rh/rh-ruby23/root/usr/share/ruby/timeout.rb:33:in `block in catch' /opt/rh/rh-ruby23/root/usr/share/ruby/timeout.rb:33:in `catch' /opt/rh/rh-ruby23/root/usr/share/ruby/timeout.rb:33:in `catch' /opt/rh/rh-ruby23/root/usr/share/ruby/timeout.rb:106:in `timeout' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_queue.rb:343:in `deliver' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_queue_worker_base/runner.rb:106:in `deliver_queue_message' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_queue_worker_base/runner.rb:134:in `deliver_message' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_queue_worker_base/runner.rb:152:in `block in do_work' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_queue_worker_base/runner.rb:146:in `loop' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_queue_worker_base/runner.rb:146:in `do_work' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker/runner.rb:334:in `block in do_work_loop' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker/runner.rb:331:in `loop' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker/runner.rb:331:in `do_work_loop' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker/runner.rb:153:in `run' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker/runner.rb:128:in `start' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker/runner.rb:21:in `start_worker' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker.rb:343:in `block in start' /opt/rh/cfme-gemset/gems/nakayoshi_fork-0.0.3/lib/nakayoshi_fork.rb:24:in `fork' /opt/rh/cfme-gemset/gems/nakayoshi_fork-0.0.3/lib/nakayoshi_fork.rb:24:in `fork' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker.rb:341:in `start' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker.rb:270:in `start_worker' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker.rb:150:in `block in sync_workers' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker.rb:150:in `times' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_worker.rb:150:in `sync_workers' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_server/worker_management/monitor.rb:52:in `block in sync_workers' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_server/worker_management/monitor.rb:50:in `each' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_server/worker_management/monitor.rb:50:in `sync_workers' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_server.rb:158:in `start' /var/www/miq/vmdb/app/models/miq_server.rb:249:in `start' /var/www/miq/vmdb/lib/workers/evm_server.rb:65:in `start' /var/www/miq/vmdb/lib/workers/evm_server.rb:92:in `start' /var/www/miq/vmdb/lib/workers/bin/evm_server.rb:4:in `<main>'
Mainn can you check it out?
Ah, yes - I think I forgot to add some Exception constants. Aziza, if you're using OSP < 10, you may also have to explicitly start the openstack cinder backup service on the overcloud controller node.
Please assess the importance of this issue and update the priority accordingly. Somewhere it was missed in the bug triage process. Please refer to https://bugzilla.redhat.com/page.cgi?id=fields.html#priority for a reminder on each priority's definition. If it's something like a tracker bug where it doesn't matter, please set it to Low/Low.
I believe this has been fixed by https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq-gems-pending/commit/3aed294bca2cfc47f9e64263f5a8c992b75eabbd
Verified ======== 5.9.0.10
Since the problem described in this bug report should be resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a resolution of ERRATA. For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated files, follow the link below. If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report. https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2018:0380