Fix listServiceOfferings regression

[winterhazel]

Description

This PR fixes a regression introduced in 4.19.1.0 in the listServiceOfferings API.

The API's query was being built with an AND where there previously was an OR. This regression caused the API to not return the expected offerings, breaking the dynamic scale of instances via the UI (#9879).

Fixes: #9879

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• build/CI
• test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

How Has This Been Tested?

1. I tried listing the service offering for a virtual machine with dynamic scale enabled that uses a custom constrained offering via CMK, and verified the performed query.

a) Before the regression, the following query would be performed:

SELECT service_offering_view.id, service_offering_view.uuid, service_offering_view.name, service_offering_view.display_text, service_offering_view.provisioning_type, service_offering_view.tags, service_offering_view.use_local_storage, service_offering_view.system_use, service_offering_view.cpu, service_offering_view.speed, service_offering_view.ram_size, service_offering_view.nw_rate, service_offering_view.mc_rate, service_offering_view.ha_enabled, service_offering_view.limit_cpu_use, service_offering_view.is_volatile, service_offering_view.host_tag, service_offering_view.default_use, service_offering_view.vm_type, service_offering_view.customized_iops, service_offering_view.min_iops, service_offering_view.max_iops, service_offering_view.hv_ss_reserve, service_offering_view.sort_key, service_offering_view.bytes_read_rate, service_offering_view.bytes_read_rate_max, service_offering_view.bytes_read_rate_max_length, service_offering_view.bytes_write_rate, service_offering_view.bytes_write_rate_max, service_offering_view.bytes_write_rate_max_length, service_offering_view.iops_read_rate, service_offering_view.iops_read_rate_max, service_offering_view.iops_read_rate_max_length, service_offering_view.iops_write_rate, service_offering_view.iops_write_rate_max, service_offering_view.iops_write_rate_max_length, service_offering_view.created, service_offering_view.removed, service_offering_view.domain_id, service_offering_view.domain_uuid, service_offering_view.domain_name, service_offering_view.domain_path, service_offering_view.zone_id, service_offering_view.zone_uuid, service_offering_view.zone_name, service_offering_view.deployment_planner, service_offering_view.cache_mode, service_offering_view.min_cpu, service_offering_view.max_cpu, service_offering_view.min_memory, service_offering_view.max_memory, service_offering_view.vsphere_storage_policy, service_offering_view.root_disk_size, service_offering_view.dynamic_scaling_enabled, service_offering_view.disk_offering_strictness, service_offering_view.disk_offering_id, service_offering_view.disk_offering_uuid, service_offering_view.disk_offering_name, service_offering_view.disk_offering_display_text, service_offering_view.encrypt_root FROM service_offering_view WHERE service_offering_view.disk_offering_strictness = 0  AND service_offering_view.use_local_storage = 0  AND  ( (service_offering_view.cpu >= 1 )  OR  (service_offering_view.cpu IS NULL  AND service_offering_view.max_cpu IS NULL )  OR  (service_offering_view.cpu IS NULL  AND service_offering_view.max_cpu >= 1 ) )  AND  (service_offering_view.speed >= 1024  OR service_offering_view.speed IS NULL )  AND  ( (service_offering_view.ram_size >= 1024 )  OR  (service_offering_view.ram_size IS NULL  AND service_offering_view.max_memory IS NULL )  OR  (service_offering_view.ram_size IS NULL  AND service_offering_view.max_memory >= 1024 ) )  AND service_offering_view.dynamic_scaling_enabled = 1  AND service_offering_view.system_use = 0  AND service_offering_view.removed IS NULL  ORDER BY service_offering_view.sort_key ASC , service_offering_view.id ASC  LIMIT 0, 500

Originally, the section that got regressed was:

(service_offering_view.ram_size IS NULL  AND service_offering_view.max_memory IS NULL )  OR  (service_offering_view.ram_size IS NULL  AND service_offering_view.max_memory >= 1024 )

b) With the regression, the following query is performed:

SELECT DISTINCT(service_offering.id) FROM service_offering  LEFT JOIN service_offering_details maxComputeDetailsSearch ON service_offering.id=maxComputeDetailsSearch.service_offering_id AND 'maxcpunumber'=maxComputeDetailsSearch.name  LEFT JOIN service_offering_details maxMemoryDetailsSearch ON service_offering.id=maxMemoryDetailsSearch.service_offering_id AND 'maxmemory'=maxMemoryDetailsSearch.name  INNER JOIN disk_offering diskOfferingSearch ON service_offering.disk_offering_id=diskOfferingSearch.id AND 'Active'=diskOfferingSearch.state WHERE service_offering.state = 'Active'  AND service_offering.disk_offering_strictness = 0  AND  ( service_offering.cpu >= 1  OR  ( service_offering.cpu IS NULL  AND  ( maxComputeDetailsSearch.value IS NULL  OR maxComputeDetailsSearch.value >= 1  )  )  )  AND  ( service_offering.speed IS NULL  OR service_offering.speed >= 1024  )  AND  ( service_offering.ram_size >= 1024  OR  ( service_offering.ram_size IS NULL  AND  ( maxMemoryDetailsSearch.value IS NULL  AND maxMemoryDetailsSearch.value >= 1024  )  )  )  AND service_offering.dynamic_scaling_enabled = 1  AND service_offering.system_use = 0  AND service_offering.removed IS NULL  AND  (diskOfferingSearch.use_local_storage = 0 ) ORDER BY service_offering.sort_key ASC , service_offering.id ASC  LIMIT 0, 500

The problematic section:

( service_offering.ram_size IS NULL  AND  ( maxMemoryDetailsSearch.value IS NULL  AND maxMemoryDetailsSearch.value >= 1024  )

c) With the patch:

SELECT DISTINCT(service_offering.id) FROM service_offering  LEFT JOIN service_offering_details maxComputeDetailsSearch ON service_offering.id=maxComputeDetailsSearch.service_offering_id AND 'maxcpunumber'=maxComputeDetailsSearch.name  LEFT JOIN service_offering_details maxMemoryDetailsSearch ON service_offering.id=maxMemoryDetailsSearch.service_offering_id AND 'maxmemory'=maxMemoryDetailsSearch.name  INNER JOIN disk_offering diskOfferingSearch ON service_offering.disk_offering_id=diskOfferingSearch.id AND 'Active'=diskOfferingSearch.state WHERE service_offering.state = 'Active'  AND service_offering.disk_offering_strictness = 0  AND  ( service_offering.cpu >= 1  OR  ( service_offering.cpu IS NULL  AND  ( maxComputeDetailsSearch.value IS NULL  OR maxComputeDetailsSearch.value >= 1  )  )  )  AND  ( service_offering.speed IS NULL  OR service_offering.speed >= 1024  )  AND  ( service_offering.ram_size >= 1024  OR  ( service_offering.ram_size IS NULL  AND  ( maxMemoryDetailsSearch.value IS NULL  OR maxMemoryDetailsSearch.value >= 1024  )  )  )  AND service_offering.dynamic_scaling_enabled = 1  AND service_offering.system_use = 0  AND service_offering.removed IS NULL  AND  (diskOfferingSearch.use_local_storage = 0 ) ORDER BY service_offering.sort_key ASC , service_offering.id ASC  LIMIT 0, 500

The second AND was reverted to an OR:

( service_offering.ram_size IS NULL  AND  ( maxMemoryDetailsSearch.value IS NULL  OR maxMemoryDetailsSearch.value >= 1024  )  )

2. Via the UI, I tried to dynamic scale the VM, and verified that I was able to scale it successfully.

[winterhazel]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@winterhazel a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 15.11%. Comparing base (175eed2) to head (dd4c857).
Report is 23 commits behind head on 4.19.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...ain/java/com/cloud/api/query/QueryManagerImpl.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               4.19    #9894      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     15.08%   15.11%   +0.02%     
- Complexity    11203    11220      +17     
============================================
  Files          5404     5404              
  Lines        473423   473426       +3     
  Branches      59987    59988       +1     
============================================
+ Hits          71429    71550     +121     
+ Misses       394044   393878     -166     
- Partials       7950     7998      +48     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	4.30% <ø> (ø)
unittests	15.83% <0.00%> (+0.02%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 11511

[weizhouapache]

code lgtm

not tested

[kiranchavala]

LGTM, Tested manually with both Custom constrained and Custom unconstrained offerings

Before the fix

After the fix