cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ivan Kudryavtsev <kudryavtsev...@bw-sw.com>
Subject Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Date Wed, 22 Nov 2017 12:14:45 GMT
So, basically I changed it to

sb.and("resourceUuid", sb.entity().getResourceUuid(), SearchCriteria.Op.IN);
sb.and("resourceType", sb.entity().getResourceType(), SearchCriteria.Op.EQ);


And launched marvin tests. I suppose resourceId filtering is completely
wrong here.


22 нояб. 2017 г. 7:12 ПП пользователь "Ivan Kudryavtsev" <
kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com> написал:

Yes, you are right, but there are no other ids in the query, and rarely
(like in my case) it leads to wrong results.

22 нояб. 2017 г. 7:07 ПП пользователь "Rafael Weingärtner" <
rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> написал:

The problem seems to be related to line 308 at
> com.cloud.tags.TaggedResourceManagerImpl.deleteTags(List<String>,
> ResourceObjectType, Map<String, String>).
> It is being sent a list of resourceUUID as the filter for resourceId
>
> On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Rafael Weingärtner <
> rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The resourceId is not a real DB ID. It is the UUID converted to Long
> :(....
> > This table has four "ID" like fields, ID, UUID, resourceID, and
> > resourceUUID.
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Ivan Kudryavtsev <
> > kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi, I just enabled log all queries and copied actual query which I have
> >> shown in the first mail. Also, I don't understand why the search should
> >> look over inner ids... Is it a case when user can pass real db ids to an
> >> api call?
> >>
> >> 22 нояб. 2017 г. 6:55 ПП пользователь "Rafael Weingärtner"
<
> >> rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> написал:
> >>
> >> > Yes, this I understood ;)
> >> >
> >> > However, I do not understand how the SQL that is being generated has
> >> this
> >> > clause: " resource_tags.resource_id='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> >> > c1bc5440ea60'".
> >> > The resourceId field in the entity is a long. So, even though that
> long
> >> > represents a String, in the final SQL that is generated it should be a
> >> long
> >> > value there.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 9:28 AM, Ivan Kudryavtsev <
> >> > kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Take a look here:
> >> > >
> >> > > SELECT resource_tags.id, resource_tags.uuid, resource_tags.key,
> >> > > resource_tags.value, resource_tags.domain_id,
> >> resource_tags.account_id,
> >> > > resource_tags.resource_id, resource_tags.resource_uuid,
> >> > > resource_tags.resource_type, resource_tags.customer FROM
> resource_tags
> >> > > WHERE  ( resource_tags.resource_id='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> >> > c1bc5440ea60'
> >> > > OR resource_tags.resource_uuid=_binary'2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-
> >> > > 9465-c1bc5440ea60'
> >> > > )  AND resource_tags.resource_type = 'Account';
> >> > >
> >> > > +----+--------------------------------------+-------+-------
> >> > > +-----------+------------+-------------+--------------------
> >> > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > | id | uuid                                 | key   | value |
> >> domain_id |
> >> > > account_id | resource_id | resource_uuid                        |
> >> > > resource_type | customer |
> >> > > +----+--------------------------------------+-------+-------
> >> > > +-----------+------------+-------------+--------------------
> >> > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > |  7 | 95a1a314-2247-4622-a33f-b9b2680bc2e1 | test  | me    |
> >>  1
> >> > |
> >> > >        2 |           2 | 3199fc71-cf39-11e7-af5d-dc0ea16ecd7f |
> >> Account
> >> > >   | NULL     |
> >> > > | 10 | 6c247aa1-5524-4910-9b5f-c6cfd9b3bdd9 | test3 | me    |
> >>  1
> >> > |
> >> > >        4 |           4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 |
> >> Account
> >> > >   | NULL     |
> >> > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2   |
> >>  1
> >> > |
> >> > >        4 |           4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 |
> >> Account
> >> > >   | NULL     |
> >> > > +----+--------------------------------------+-------+-------
> >> > > +-----------+------------+-------------+--------------------
> >> > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > 3 rows in set, 1 warning (0.01 sec)
> >> > >
> >> > > Try to figure out why id=7 is selected here?
> >> > >
> >> > > Because:
> >> > > resource_tags.resource_id='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60'
> >> > >
> >> > > Matched unintentionally, because mysql converted uuid to int and
> got 2
> >> > > which is matched to resource_id of 2 (id=7).
> >> > >
> >> > > 22 нояб. 2017 г. 6:23 ПП пользователь "Rafael Weingärtner"
<
> >> > > rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> написал:
> >> > >
> >> > > > Ah, ok now it makes sense the "IN", I thought you were only
> talking
> >> > about
> >> > > > single values.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I do not think that the UUID (resource UUID) is the representation
> >> of
> >> > ID
> >> > > > value in Hexadecimal, if it is we could simply get rid of one
of
> >> them.
> >> > I
> >> > > > really dislike these search criteria...I am not seeing what you
> are
> >> > > saying.
> >> > > > Let´s see this in SQL, so we can discuss.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > SELECT * FROM resource_tags
> >> > > > WHERE  (resource_id in (....) OR resource_uuid in (...))
> >> > > > AND resource_tags.resource_type = 'Account';
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > That is what the programmer who coded that Search criteria seemed
> to
> >> > > want,
> >> > > > right? I mean, the developer wanted to select resources that
match
> >> > either
> >> > > > the ID or UUID field. Also, we may have more than a single value
> to
> >> > > filter
> >> > > > in both ID and UUID. I am also assuming that UUID does not
> >> necessarily
> >> > > > represents the ID as a hexadecimal.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > The problem seems to be when it is being translated:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > ( resource_tags.resource_id='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440e
> >> a60'
> >> > > > > OR
> >> > > > > resource_tags.resource_uuid=_binary'2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-
> >> > > > 9465-c1bc5440ea60'
> >> > > > > )
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > It is not even using an “IN” structure in the SQL. Also,
why is
> the
> >> > > > resource_id equals the UUID in the filter. Did you check the
> entity
> >> > that
> >> > > is
> >> > > > being sent as an example? Are the fields ID and UUID set with
the
> >> same
> >> > > > values?
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > P.S. Normally the ID field of entities is not exposed to users
via
> >> API.
> >> > > The
> >> > > > field ID in the API is translated to UUID in ACS. The field ID
in
> >> the
> >> > > > database is intended as a dummy primary key for the table.
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 9:05 AM, Ivan Kudryavtsev <
> >> > > > kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > > Hi, Rafael, 'IN" because API call assumes that several
> resourceIds
> >> > can
> >> > > be
> >> > > > > provided, so IN solves it, EQ doesn't.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > But despite semantics ID/UUID you see that ID is integer
and
> UUID
> >> is
> >> > > > string
> >> > > > > and that comparison does fault positive results, next when
> object
> >> > > access
> >> > > > > for caller is checked exception occured and no tag removal
> happen
> >> as
> >> > a
> >> > > > > result because int(2) eq '2afcffdsfdsfds-... (UUID)".
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > 2017-11-22 18:01 GMT+07:00 Rafael Weingärtner <
> >> > > > rafaelweingartner@gmail.com
> >> > > > > >:
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > > Are ID and UUID set with the same values in that entity?
If
> not,
> >> > the
> >> > > > > > criteria seem correct. I mean, it is trying to filter
for an
> ID
> >> if
> >> > it
> >> > > > > > exists or by UUID if it exists in the entity that is
passed as
> >> an
> >> > > > > example.
> >> > > > > > What I do not understand is that they are using “
> >> > > SearchCriteria.Op.IN
> >> > > > ”,
> >> > > > > > but
> >> > > > > > in my opinion, it should be “SearchCriteria.Op.EQ”.
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 7:58 AM, Ivan Kudryavtsev <
> >> > > > > > kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com>
> >> > > > > > wrote:
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Hi, I found interesting behaviour with tags:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > mysql> SELECT resource_tags.id, resource_tags.uuid,
> >> > > > resource_tags.key,
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.value, resource_tags.domain_id,
> >> > > > resource_tags.account_id,
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.resource_id, resource_tags.resource_uuid,
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.resource_type, resource_tags.customer
FROM
> >> > > > resource_tags
> >> > > > > > > WHERE  ( resource_tags.resource_id='2a4
> 264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> >> > > > > > c1bc5440ea60'
> >> > > > > > > OR
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.resource_uuid=_binary'2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-
> >> > > > > > 9465-c1bc5440ea60'
> >> > > > > > > )
> >> > > > > > >  AND resource_tags.resource_type = 'Account';
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > +----+------------------------
> --------------+-------+-------
> >> > > > > > > +-----------+------------+----
> ---------+--------------------
> >> > > > > > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > > > > > | id | uuid                                 |
key   | value
> |
> >> > > > > domain_id |
> >> > > > > > > account_id | resource_id | resource_uuid
> >>   |
> >> > > > > > > resource_type | customer |
> >> > > > > > > +----+------------------------
> --------------+-------+-------
> >> > > > > > > +-----------+------------+----
> ---------+--------------------
> >> > > > > > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > > > > > |  7 | 95a1a314-2247-4622-a33f-b9b2680bc2e1 |
test  | me
>   |
> >> > > > >  1
> >> > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > >        2 |           2 | 3199fc71-cf39-11e7-af5d-dc0ea1
> 6ecd7f
> >> |
> >> > > > > Account
> >> > > > > > >   | NULL     |
> >> > > > > > > | 10 | 6c247aa1-5524-4910-9b5f-c6cfd9b3bdd9 |
test3 | me
>   |
> >> > > > >  1
> >> > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > >        4 |           4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc54
> 40ea60
> >> |
> >> > > > > Account
> >> > > > > > >   | NULL     |
> >> > > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 |
test5 | me2
>  |
> >> > > > >  1
> >> > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > >        4 |           4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc54
> 40ea60
> >> |
> >> > > > > Account
> >> > > > > > >   | NULL     |
> >> > > > > > > +----+------------------------
> --------------+-------+-------
> >> > > > > > > +-----------+------------+----
> ---------+--------------------
> >> > > > > > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > > > > > 3 rows in set, 1 warning (0.01 sec)
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Don't see that "resource_type" is "account". I
just play
> with
> >> it.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Take a look at ID=7. This row is found because:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.resource_id='2a4
> 264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440e
> >> a60'
> >> > > > when
> >> > > > > > > right
> >> > > > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is
here:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/clou
> dstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
> >> > > > > 1f65c6691fcf
> >> > > > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/clou
> d/tags/TaggedResourceManagerIm
> >> > > > > pl.java#L301
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > sb.and().op("resourceId", sb.entity().getResourceId(),
> >> > > > > > > SearchCriteria.Op.IN);
> >> > > > > > > sb.or("resourceUuid", sb.entity().getResourceUuid(),
> >> > > > > > SearchCriteria.Op.IN
> >> > > > > > > );
> >> > > > > > > sb.cp();
> >> > > > > > > sb.and("resourceType", sb.entity().getResourceType(),
> >> > > > > > > SearchCriteria.Op.EQ);
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > I don't know why the writer uses "resourceId"
or
> >> "resourceUuid".
> >> > I
> >> > > > > > suppose
> >> > > > > > > it's a bug and code should be transformed to:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > sb.and("resourceUuid", sb.entity().getResourceUuid(),
> >> > > > > > SearchCriteria.Op.IN
> >> > > > > > > );
> >> > > > > > > sb.and("resourceType", sb.entity().getResourceType(),
> >> > > > > > > SearchCriteria.Op.EQ);
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Or MySQL query should be transformed to:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > mysql> SELECT resource_tags.id, resource_tags.uuid,
> >> > > > resource_tags.key,
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.value, resource_tags.domain_id,
> >> > > > resource_tags.account_id,
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.resource_id, resource_tags.resource_uuid,
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.resource_type, resource_tags.customer
FROM
> >> > > > resource_tags
> >> > > > > > > WHERE  ( concat("%", resource_tags.resource_id)
=
> >> > > > > > > '2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60' OR
> >> > > > > > > resource_tags.resource_uuid=_binary'2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-
> >> > > > > > 9465-c1bc5440ea60'
> >> > > > > > > )
> >> > > > > > >  AND resource_tags.resource_type = 'Account';
> >> > > > > > > +----+------------------------
> --------------+-------+-------
> >> > > > > > > +-----------+------------+----
> ---------+--------------------
> >> > > > > > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > > > > > | id | uuid                                 |
key   | value
> |
> >> > > > > domain_id |
> >> > > > > > > account_id | resource_id | resource_uuid
> >>   |
> >> > > > > > > resource_type | customer |
> >> > > > > > > +----+------------------------
> --------------+-------+-------
> >> > > > > > > +-----------+------------+----
> ---------+--------------------
> >> > > > > > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > > > > > | 10 | 6c247aa1-5524-4910-9b5f-c6cfd9b3bdd9 |
test3 | me
>   |
> >> > > > >  1
> >> > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > >        4 |           4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc54
> 40ea60
> >> |
> >> > > > > Account
> >> > > > > > >   | NULL     |
> >> > > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 |
test5 | me2
>  |
> >> > > > >  1
> >> > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > >        4 |           4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc54
> 40ea60
> >> |
> >> > > > > Account
> >> > > > > > >   | NULL     |
> >> > > > > > > +----+------------------------
> --------------+-------+-------
> >> > > > > > > +-----------+------------+----
> ---------+--------------------
> >> > > > > > > ------------------+---------------+----------+
> >> > > > > > > 2 rows in set (0.00 sec)
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > Let me your thoughts and I'll fix it. Right now,
obviously
> >> it's a
> >> > > > bug.
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > > With best regards, Ivan Kudryavtsev
> >> > > > > > > Bitworks Software, Ltd.
> >> > > > > > > Cell: +7-923-414-1515 <+7%20923%20414-15-15>
> >> > > > > > > WWW: http://bitworks.software/ <http://bw-sw.com/>
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > > > --
> >> > > > > > Rafael Weingärtner
> >> > > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > --
> >> > > > > With best regards, Ivan Kudryavtsev
> >> > > > > Bitworks Software, Ltd.
> >> > > > > Cell: +7-923-414-1515
> >> > > > > WWW: http://bitworks.software/ <http://bw-sw.com/>
> >> > > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > > --
> >> > > > Rafael Weingärtner
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Rafael Weingärtner
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rafael Weingärtner
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Rafael Weingärtner
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message