Hide Forgot
Created attachment 573634 [details] text Description of problem: Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: Steps to Reproduce: 1.Login to conductor 2.create a new zone (say 'test') 3.create a new application in "default" zone with the name "Application1" 4.Create a new application in "test" zone with the same name "Application1" Actual results: Observed that user is able to create application with the same name BUT a message "That name is already in use" was getting displayed next to the "Application name" text field(PFA: text.png) Expected results: This message "That name is already in use" should be displayed only if the name duplication is happening with in the zone Additional info: rpm -qa | grep aeolus aeolus-conductor-0.8.3-1.el6.noarch aeolus-conductor-daemons-0.8.3-1.el6.noarch rubygem-aeolus-image-0.3.0-12.el6.noarch aeolus-configure-2.5.2-1.el6.noarch aeolus-all-0.8.3-1.el6.noarch rubygem-aeolus-cli-0.3.1-1.el6.noarch aeolus-conductor-doc-0.8.3-1.el6.noarch
I have a feeling that is the current design, maybe it will change.. Asking Scott
From the look of it, we're only restricting uniqueness on the back end within one zone: validates_uniqueness_of :name, :scope => :pool_id It looks like it's only the javascript validation that's failing -- but the server-side validation on submit is using the model validation properly. So this is a bug, but it's a UI annoyance rather than the incorrect validation rules being applied. There may be a related issue here -- if you have two applications with the same name, in different zones, and they're scheduled with the same provider, will we have name uniqueness problems on the provider-side?
We need to establish whether the concern that Scott raises in Comment 2 actually applies.
Cloud Engine/conductor 2.0 is not currently planned; this code is no longer maintained.