You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cloudstack.apache.org by Ivan Kudryavtsev <ku...@bw-sw.com> on 2017/11/22 09:58:54 UTC
Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
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='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)
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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60' when right
part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa798101f65c6691fcf71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/tags/TaggedResourceManagerImpl.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-c1bc5440ea60 | Account
| NULL |
| 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 | 1 |
4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 | 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
WWW: http://bitworks.software/ <http://bw-sw.com/>
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Rafael Weingärtner <ra...@gmail.com>.
I did not understand what you said. Are you talking about the data used in
the SQL filters?
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:10 AM, Ivan Kudryavtsev <kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com
> wrote:
> So, I don't understand. As you can see there is no longs in sql dump. Just
> uuids. I run actual delete tags query against simulator and it leads to
> this sql search which filters wrong data. As I see, query is incorrect.
>
> 22 нояб. 2017 г. 7:03 ПП пользователь "Rafael Weingärtner" <
> rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> написал:
>
> > 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-
> > c1bc5440ea60'
> > > > > > > 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='
> 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)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> > > c1bc5440ea60'
> > > > > > when
> > > > > > > > > right
> > > > > > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/
> 87ef8137534fa79810
> > > > > > > 1f65c6691fcf
> > > > > > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-
> > c1bc5440ea60
> > > |
> > > > > > > Account
> > > > > > > > > | NULL |
> > > > > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2
> > |
> > > > > > > 1
> > > > > > > > |
> > > > > > > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> > c1bc5440ea60
> > > |
> > > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > > > 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
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Ivan Kudryavtsev <ku...@bw-sw.com>.
So, I don't understand. As you can see there is no longs in sql dump. Just
uuids. I run actual delete tags query against simulator and it leads to
this sql search which filters wrong data. As I see, query is incorrect.
22 нояб. 2017 г. 7:03 ПП пользователь "Rafael Weingärtner" <
rafaelweingartner@gmail.com> написал:
> 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-
> c1bc5440ea60'
> > > > > > 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='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)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> > c1bc5440ea60'
> > > > > when
> > > > > > > > right
> > > > > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
> > > > > > 1f65c6691fcf
> > > > > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-
> c1bc5440ea60
> > |
> > > > > > Account
> > > > > > > > | NULL |
> > > > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2
> |
> > > > > > 1
> > > > > > > |
> > > > > > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> c1bc5440ea60
> > |
> > > > > > 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
> > > > > > > > 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
>
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Rafael Weingärtner <ra...@gmail.com>.
Then, I believe we can remove that filter in the search criteria as you
suggested and also remove the line 308.
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:12 AM, Ivan Kudryavtsev <kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com
> wrote:
> 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='
> > 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)
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> > c1bc5440e
> > >> a60'
> > >> > > > when
> > >> > > > > > > right
> > >> > > > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> > >> > > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/
> > 87ef8137534fa79810
> > >> > > > > 1f65c6691fcf
> > >> > > > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-
> > c1bc5440ea60
> > >> |
> > >> > > > > Account
> > >> > > > > > > | NULL |
> > >> > > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2
> > |
> > >> > > > > 1
> > >> > > > > > |
> > >> > > > > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> > c1bc5440ea60
> > >> |
> > >> > > > > 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
> >
>
--
Rafael Weingärtner
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Rafael Weingärtner <ra...@gmail.com>.
That is what it seems
On Wed, Nov 22, 2017 at 10:14 AM, Ivan Kudryavtsev <kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com
> wrote:
> 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
> >
>
--
Rafael Weingärtner
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Ivan Kudryavtsev <ku...@bw-sw.com>.
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
>
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Ivan Kudryavtsev <ku...@bw-sw.com>.
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='
> 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)
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> c1bc5440e
> >> a60'
> >> > > > when
> >> > > > > > > right
> >> > > > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> >> > > > > > >
> >> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/
> 87ef8137534fa79810
> >> > > > > 1f65c6691fcf
> >> > > > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-
> c1bc5440ea60
> >> |
> >> > > > > Account
> >> > > > > > > | NULL |
> >> > > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2
> |
> >> > > > > 1
> >> > > > > > |
> >> > > > > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> c1bc5440ea60
> >> |
> >> > > > > 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
>
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Rafael Weingärtner <ra...@gmail.com>.
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='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)
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440e
>> a60'
>> > > > when
>> > > > > > > right
>> > > > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
>> > > > > 1f65c6691fcf
>> > > > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-c1bc5440ea60
>> |
>> > > > > Account
>> > > > > > > | NULL |
>> > > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 |
>> > > > > 1
>> > > > > > |
>> > > > > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60
>> |
>> > > > > 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
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Rafael Weingärtner <ra...@gmail.com>.
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-c1bc5440ea60'
> > > > > 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='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)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-
> c1bc5440ea60'
> > > > when
> > > > > > > right
> > > > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
> > > > > 1f65c6691fcf
> > > > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-c1bc5440ea60
> |
> > > > > Account
> > > > > > > | NULL |
> > > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 |
> > > > > 1
> > > > > > |
> > > > > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60
> |
> > > > > 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
> > > > > > > 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
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Ivan Kudryavtsev <ku...@bw-sw.com>.
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-c1bc5440ea60'
> > > > 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='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)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60'
> > > when
> > > > > > right
> > > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
> > > > 1f65c6691fcf
> > > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-c1bc5440ea60 |
> > > > Account
> > > > > > | NULL |
> > > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 |
> > > > 1
> > > > > |
> > > > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 |
> > > > 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
> > > > > > 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
>
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Rafael Weingärtner <ra...@gmail.com>.
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 <ku...@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-c1bc5440ea60'
> > > 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='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)
> > > > >
> > > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60'
> > when
> > > > > right
> > > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> > > > >
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
> > > 1f65c6691fcf
> > > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-c1bc5440ea60 |
> > > Account
> > > > > | NULL |
> > > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 |
> > > 1
> > > > |
> > > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 |
> > > 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
> > > > > 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
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Ivan Kudryavtsev <ku...@bw-sw.com>.
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-c1bc5440ea60'
> > 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='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)
> > > >
> > > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60'
> when
> > > > right
> > > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> > > >
> > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
> > 1f65c6691fcf
> > > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-c1bc5440ea60 |
> > Account
> > > > | NULL |
> > > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 |
> > 1
> > > |
> > > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 |
> > 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
> > > > 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
>
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Rafael Weingärtner <ra...@gmail.com>.
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-c1bc5440ea60'
> 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 <ku...@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='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)
> > >
> > > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60' when
> > > right
> > > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
> 1f65c6691fcf
> > > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-c1bc5440ea60 |
> Account
> > > | NULL |
> > > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 |
> 1
> > |
> > > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 |
> 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
> > > 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
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Ivan Kudryavtsev <ku...@bw-sw.com>.
I mean that it's like SQL injection. API call expects UUID for resourceID,
but in code that API value is checked against resourceID which is integer
and internal to DB and against resourceUuid which is known for API... This
looks weird even without keeping in mind it grabs extra irrelevant results
during the search.
22 нояб. 2017 г. 6:05 ПП пользователь "Ivan Kudryavtsev" <
kudryavtsev_ia@bw-sw.com> написал:
> 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440e
>> a60'
>> > 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)
>> >
>> > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60' when
>> > right
>> > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa79810
>> 1f65c6691fcf
>> > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/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-c1bc5440ea60 | Account
>> > | NULL |
>> > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 |
>> 1 |
>> > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 | 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
>> > 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/>
>
>
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Ivan Kudryavtsev <ku...@bw-sw.com>.
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 <ra...@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='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)
> >
> > 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60' when
> > right
> > part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa798101f65c6691fcf
> > 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/tags/TaggedResourceManagerImpl.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-c1bc5440ea60 | Account
> > | NULL |
> > | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 | 1
> |
> > 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 | 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
> > 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/>
Re: Tag removal problem found. Need assistance how to fix
Posted by Rafael Weingärtner <ra...@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 <ku...@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='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)
>
> 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='2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60' when
> right
> part is converted to int. Corresponding code is here:
>
> https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/blob/87ef8137534fa798101f65c6691fcf
> 71513ac978/server/src/com/cloud/tags/TaggedResourceManagerImpl.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-c1bc5440ea60 | Account
> | NULL |
> | 12 | 25fb7848-af34-42f7-855e-0f5909a4e979 | test5 | me2 | 1 |
> 4 | 4 | 2a4264fb-9f63-4d4f-9465-c1bc5440ea60 | 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
> WWW: http://bitworks.software/ <http://bw-sw.com/>
>
--
Rafael Weingärtner