All, I made a comment on its jira, CLOUDSTACK-3190<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3190>, so can anyone confirm what I found? I guess it is related with some refactoring related with 'CallContext' class.
If correct, I'd like make changes because it is a blocker of what I'm working on for CLOUDSTACK-4992<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-4992> . Thanks Alex Ough On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Nitin Mehta <nitin.me...@citrix.com> wrote: > David - CallContext gets created during the entry point of the API. > I haven't had the chance to completely investigate but I am hoping that > you can push the UUID then or on completion of the API (in case where you > are creating the actual resource). > See if that works else there is no other way out. > > Another feedback on Rabbit MQ would be to push the list of all the first > class objects (UUIDs) that are affected in the event description if > possible. Say user invokes attachVolume to a vm. It would be good to > always push vm uuid. > Just putting in the volume uuid necessitates another call to CS and also > that this was attach volume operation. > > Thanks, > -Nitin > > On 20/11/13 8:23 AM, "David Grizzanti" <david.grizza...@sungard.com> > wrote: > > >Thanks for the feedback and info on the existing bug filed for this. > > > >Nitin - I was originally thinking along the lines of what Murali has > >recently commented (i.e. adding Entity Details in the UserContext in all > >the places where an Action Event is generated). The particular case I > >was using this for when I found the issue was for creating a network, > >which is not an async job. The AsyncJobManager I believe it generating a > >different type of event that what I was originally looking at. > > > >Let me know your thoughts. > > > >Thanks > > > >-- > >David Grizzanti > >Software Engineer > >Sungard Availability Services > > > >e: david.grizza...@sungard.com > >w: 215.446.1431 > >c: 570.575.0315 > > > >On November 20, 2013 at 2:45:50 AM, Murali Reddy > >(murali.re...@citrix.com) wrote: > > > > > > > >On 20/11/13 2:15 AM, "David Grizzanti" <david.grizza...@sungard.com> > >wrote: > > > >>Hi All, > >> > >>I noticed that the event messages going to rabbitmq of type > >>"ActionEvent" > >>are missing any reference to the entity Id/UUID. Was this omission > >>intentional? Poking through the code, I was able to find that adding the > >> > >>information on to the event is fairly straightforward (albeit a bit > >>tedious). Does anyone have any objections to updating these event types > >>with this information? I can file the appropriate Jira, but wanted to > >>check in with the list first to get opinions. > > > >David, > > > >Omission is not intentional. Please see [1] for earlier discussion. There > > > >is a bug opened as well[2]. > > > >If you see ActionEventUtils, there is code that gets 'entity type' and > >'entity uuid' from the CallContext and fills the details on the message > >published. I added this as generic mechanism. Unfortunately, there is not > > > >a single place where if you populate the entity type and uuid in the call > > > >context then things would fall in place. So its tedious job of adding the > > > >entity type and uuid details to the call context to all the methods > >annotated with 'ActionEvent', but other wise it is a much needed fix. > > > >[1] > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cloudstack-dev/201306.mbox/%3CCDF > >1 > >db6a.424d9%25murali.re...@citrix.com%3E > >[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CLOUDSTACK-3190 > > > > > >> Example event for network creation below. > >> > >>Thanks > >> > >>---------- > >>@source="management-server", @type="ActionEvent", > >>@action="NETWORK-CREATE", @resource_type="Network", @resource_id="*"> > >>{ > >> "status": "Completed", > >> "event": "NETWORK.CREATE", > >> "account": "6d836cf8-47cd-11e3-a130-606d02c0c082", > >> "user": "6d838544-47cd-11e3-a130-606d02c0c082" > >>} > >> > >>-- > >>David Grizzanti > >>Software Engineer > >>Sungard Availability Services > >> > >>e: david.grizza...@sungard.com > >>w: 215.446.1431 > >>c: 570.575.0315 > > > > > > > > >
