Bug 1406770 - all volumes in systems are shown under a pod summary
Summary: all volumes in systems are shown under a pod summary
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Providers
Version: 5.7.0
Hardware: x86_64
OS: Linux
unspecified
high
Target Milestone: GA
: 5.8.0
Assignee: zakiva
QA Contact: Einat Pacifici
URL:
Whiteboard: container
Depends On: 1423450 1434778
Blocks: 1428512
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-12-21 12:28 UTC by Dafna Ron
Modified: 2017-08-29 04:01 UTC (History)
11 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 5.8.0.0
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
: 1428512 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-06-12 17:08:15 UTC
Category: ---
Cloudforms Team: Container Management
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)
screenshot (550.40 KB, image/x-xcf)
2016-12-21 12:28 UTC, Dafna Ron
no flags Details
All pods in the cluster (61.30 KB, text/plain)
2017-01-03 12:27 UTC, zakiva
no flags Details
All persistent volumes in the cluster (2.87 KB, text/plain)
2017-01-03 12:27 UTC, zakiva
no flags Details
All persistent volume clames in the cluster (2.99 KB, text/plain)
2017-01-03 12:28 UTC, zakiva
no flags Details

Description Dafna Ron 2016-12-21 12:28:03 UTC
Created attachment 1234370 [details]
screenshot

Description of problem:

when I select a specific pod to look at it's summary I expect to see only the volumes that apply to that pod. However, I am seeing the volumes from the whole system. 

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

cfme-5.7.0.17-1.el7cf.x86_64

How reproducible:

100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1. create several pvs
2. launch containers with the pvs
3. in cfme -> add the provider -> select the pods -> one of the pods

Actual results:

in the pods summary table, we see all of the volumes - for all the containers.

Expected results:

we should only see volumes relating to the specific container 

Additional info: screen shot 


[root@smicro-628-b09 ~]# oc get pv
NAME            CAPACITY   ACCESSMODES   STATUS    CLAIM              REASON    AGE
cloudforms      2Gi        RWO           Bound     pods/cloudforms              5d
cloudforms-01   2Gi        RWO           Bound     dafna/cloudforms             2h
dafna-pv04      2Gi        RWO           Bound     dafna/postgresql             2h
nfs-pv01        2Gi        RWO           Bound     pods/postgresql              6d
[root@smicro-628-b09 ~]# 

from describe command: 

Volumes:
  cfme-app-volume:
    Type:	PersistentVolumeClaim (a reference to a PersistentVolumeClaim in the same namespace)
    ClaimName:	cloudforms
    ReadOnly:	false
  default-token-xxxx:
    Type:	Secret (a volume populated by a Secret)
    SecretName:	default-token-xxxx


from export command: 

  volumes:
  - name: cfme-app-volume
    persistentVolumeClaim:
      claimName: cloudforms
  - name: default-token-xxxx
    secret:
      secretName: default-token-xxxx

Comment 1 Dafna Ron 2016-12-21 12:56:48 UTC
I looked at some of the other containers and I see this only shows in the cfme pod. 
hence I moved it to cfme pod component.

Comment 2 Barak 2016-12-21 16:43:33 UTC
I checked it in my PODified environment (5.7.0.16 & 17) and it showed only the PVs that were actually attached to the POD.

So moving back to component provider.

Comment 3 Federico Simoncelli 2016-12-22 09:15:49 UTC
Please:

1. check that the UI is still reporting what you showed in the screenshot here attached
2. check that a refresh was completed recently (within last hour)
3. go to the OpenShift cluster (of the relevant Pod) and provide this information (attach to BZ):

  # oc get pods --all-namespaces -o yaml
  # oc get pv -o yaml
  # oc get pvc --all-namespaces -o yaml

Comment 4 zakiva 2017-01-03 12:27:00 UTC
Created attachment 1236868 [details]
All pods in the cluster

Comment 5 zakiva 2017-01-03 12:27:58 UTC
Created attachment 1236870 [details]
All persistent volumes in the cluster

Comment 6 zakiva 2017-01-03 12:28:29 UTC
Created attachment 1236871 [details]
All persistent volume clames in the cluster

Comment 7 zakiva 2017-01-03 12:34:24 UTC
I checked with Dafna's PODified environment and reproduced the bug. I Attached all requested information.   
For non-PODified environment of manageiq (master) I could not reproduce it: added the same OpenShift provider and saw the expected results (only relevant volumes were displayed), so it may be related to cfme pod component.

Comment 8 Federico Simoncelli 2017-01-04 10:26:17 UTC
(In reply to zakiva from comment #7)
> I checked with Dafna's PODified environment and reproduced the bug. I
> Attached all requested information.   
> For non-PODified environment of manageiq (master) I could not reproduce it:
> added the same OpenShift provider and saw the expected results (only
> relevant volumes were displayed), so it may be related to cfme pod component.

I think that the issue is not in PODified vs non-PODfied but in the fact that you tried two different version. ManageIQ on master is not CloudForms 4.2.

Probably you should check if this happens with a CloudForms 4.2 official build (non-PODified), if so then it's easier for you to debug a regular appliance.

Comment 9 zakiva 2017-01-17 15:16:26 UTC
Updating that this issue is indeed NOT Podified environment related. 
I was able to reproduce the bug earlier today with a non-Podified manageiq.

Comment 10 zakiva 2017-01-22 10:05:52 UTC
Bug fix:
https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/pull/13612

Comment 11 Barak 2017-03-02 16:42:46 UTC
Patch was merged to master , moving BZ to POST

Comment 13 Dafna Ron 2017-03-22 11:12:48 UTC
volumes table is empty. 
new bug opened for that and this would be blocked until new issue fixed. 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434778

Comment 14 Federico Simoncelli 2017-03-23 09:30:12 UTC
Zahi I don't understand the dependency you added on bug 1423450. Is it a mistake?

Comment 15 zakiva 2017-03-23 09:48:03 UTC
(In reply to Federico Simoncelli from comment #14)
> Zahi I don't understand the dependency you added on bug 1423450. Is it a
> mistake?

Well, I marked 1434778 as a duplicate of 1423450, please see my comment in:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1434778. 

Since this BZ had a dependency on 1434778 it was changed automatically.

Comment 16 Dafna Ron 2017-04-03 13:06:32 UTC
verified on a vm with cfme-5.8.0.8-alpha1.1.el7cf.x86_64


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