Note: This bug is displayed in read-only format because the product is no longer active in Red Hat Bugzilla.

Bug 864530

Summary:	[RFE] Force removal of an object does not work as expected
Product:	Red Hat Enterprise Virtualization Manager	Reporter:	Ido Begun <ibegun>
Component:	RFEs	Assignee:	Andrew Cathrow <acathrow>
Status:	CLOSED WONTFIX	QA Contact:	yeylon <yeylon>
Severity:	high	Docs Contact:
Priority:	unspecified
Version:	3.1.0	CC:	acathrow, bazulay, iheim, jkt, lpeer, michal.skrivanek, oramraz, rbalakri, Rhev-m-bugs, sherold, srevivo, yeylon
Target Milestone:	---	Keywords:	FutureFeature
Target Release:	---	Flags:	sherold: Triaged+
Hardware:	Unspecified
OS:	Unspecified
Whiteboard:	virt
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Enhancement
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2014-08-03 06:34:15 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:
Bug Blocks:	890826

Description Ido Begun 2012-10-09 14:10:08 UTC

Description of problem:
Currently force remove doesn't work when there are tasks running.
Force removal should succeed removing a locked VM even if there are tasks running.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
si20

How reproducible:
100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1.Lock a VM (i.e. create a template)
2.Force remove locked VM
  
Actual results:
Removal fails - [Cannot force remove VM when there are running tasks.]

Expected results:
VM is removed.

Additional info:

Comment 1 Haim 2012-10-10 14:04:28 UTC

logs please. also, is this really expected?

Comment 2 Andrew Cathrow 2012-10-14 12:21:47 UTC

(In reply to comment #1)
> logs please. also, is this really expected?

Until we have a cancel option on this task is this really a bug?

Comment 3 Yaniv Kaul 2012-10-14 12:25:36 UTC

(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > logs please. also, is this really expected?
> 
> Until we have a cancel option on this task is this really a bug?

You can wait 50 hours and hope the task would die.

Comment 4 Michal Skrivanek 2012-10-15 12:50:11 UTC

not easy. might bring a lot of issues if we allow canceling a task in the middle. Let's revisit in 3.2

btw having r/o and r/w locks should help to mitigate some of these issue

Comment 5 Oded Ramraz 2012-12-27 09:11:31 UTC

I recommend to add the option to remove a VM forcibly without taking into consideration the storage domain status / tasks status or any other logic.

Comment 6 Simon Grinberg 2013-01-01 11:52:05 UTC

(In reply to comment #5)
> I recommend to add the option to remove a VM forcibly without taking into
> consideration the storage domain status / tasks status or any other logic.

With the lock release utility should this be covered?
Since we don't have cancel task, I prefer this to be done under GSS supervision (they may also help with proper cleanup of the task). 

Removing a single VM with leftovers is not the same as force remove storage domain where you can later clean it up on the storage side. 

Removing the 3.2 target - need to revisit for 3.3 with proper solution based on cancel tasks or comment #4 or even both.

Comment 7 Oded Ramraz 2013-03-11 07:48:15 UTC

I encountered new situation where floating disks failed to remove , I suggest to add the option to forcibly remove floating disks as well ( at least from API )

Comment 10 Itamar Heim 2014-08-03 06:34:15 UTC

Closing old bugs. If this issue is still relevant/important in current version, please re-open the bug.