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...@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" < > rafaelweingart...@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...@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 < > > rafaelweingart...@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...@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
