Removed state for removed accounts

[hsato03]

Description

When deleting an account, its state is maintained as Enabled even if it is removed.

Accordingly the Removed state for accounts was created, which is always set when an account is deleted.

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)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

I created and deleted an account. Then, I created a SELECT SQL query for the account table and the account state was Removed.

[DaanHoogland]

Good change! one remark, other entities have a state DESTROYED. maybe it would make sense to be in line with that?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Merging #7868 (f37b460) into main (78411fd) will increase coverage by 0.00%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on main.
The diff coverage is 100.00%.

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               main    #7868   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     14.40%   14.40%           
  Complexity    10109    10109           
=========================================
  Files          2748     2748           
  Lines        259390   259392    +2     
  Branches      40381    40381           
=========================================
+ Hits          37354    37355    +1     
- Misses       217203   217204    +1     
  Partials       4833     4833           

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
...c/main/java/com/cloud/user/AccountManagerImpl.java	20.57% <100.00%> (+0.09%)	⬆️

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

📣 We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more

[weizhouapache]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@weizhouapache a [SF] 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.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 6782

[DaanHoogland]

@hsato03 do you want this in 4.18.1?

[hsato03]

Good change! one remark, other entities have a state DESTROYED. maybe it would make sense to be in line with that?

@DaanHoogland Yes, that's a good idea. But some entities have the Inactive removed state like domain and vm_template.

@hsato03 do you want this in 4.18.1?

OK.

[weizhouapache]

Good change! one remark, other entities have a state DESTROYED. maybe it would make sense to be in line with that?

@DaanHoogland
to be honest, I think removed makes more sense.

[DaanHoogland]

@weizhouapache REMOVED does make sense but having different terms with the same meaning is something we should prevent, and adding a new one should replace all occurences of the old ones. Not going to block this for that reason, but it will be confusing for new operators and developers alike.

worth a discuss thread?

cc @soreana @hsato03

[weizhouapache]

@hsato03
since this is not a bug, but an improvement. let's move to next major release 4.19.0.0
cc @DaanHoogland

[DaanHoogland]

I think this can be included in 4.18.1 as well, but do not mind either way

[rohityadavcloud]

LGTM - I'm not sure if there could be only possible side-effects; or it should also emit some kind of event for usage-server?

[weizhouapache]

LGTM - I'm not sure if there could be only possible side-effects; or it should also emit some kind of event for usage-server?

it is one of my concerns as well.
let's consider it for 4.19.0.0

[github-actions]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[soreana]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@soreana a [SF] 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.

[hsato03]

I agree with @rohityadavcloud and @weizhouapache, REMOVED sounds better for accounts. @DaanHoogland Although your idea of ​​standardizing the state of entities is good, there are already other entities that use the REMOVED state.

LGTM - I'm not sure if there could be only possible side-effects; or it should also emit some kind of event for usage-server?

@rohityadavcloud ACS already emits an event when deleting an account.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✖️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 6955

[soreana]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@soreana a [SF] 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.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 6973

[soreana]

@DaanHoogland @rohityadavcloud @weizhouapache I did some research to understand the definitions of removed and destroyed in CloudStack terminology.

Once an object is Destroyed in CloudStack, it remains visible to the root admin, who has the exclusive ability to either restore or remove it. Even when an object is destroyed, it can still be restored. But once an object is removed, it cannot be restored and will be lost permanently.

As of now, it is not possible to restore the account that was removed. Therefore, using the term Remove state would be more appropriate than Destroyed.

[DaanHoogland]

have you tested @soreana ?

[soreana]

@DaanHoogland I tested that on fresh install of the CloudStack. I haven't tested the upgrade path from 4.18 to 4.19. I can check that as well later this week.

[hsato03]

Hi @soreana,

Any updates on this one?

[soreana]

Hi @DaanHoogland @hsato03,

I've tested the upgrade from 4.18.1 to 4.19 the process went smooth and the account have removed state now.

Before upgrade:

MariaDB [cloud]> select account_name,state,removed from account ;
+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+
| account_name             | state   | removed             |
+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+
| system                   | enabled | NULL                |
| admin                    | enabled | NULL                |
| baremetal-system-account | enabled | NULL                |
| Removed-01               | enabled | 2023-09-28 08:41:35 |
| Removed-02               | enabled | 2023-09-28 08:45:18 |
| Removed-03               | enabled | 2023-09-28 08:46:16 |
+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+
6 rows in set (0.001 sec)

MariaDB [cloud]>

After upgrade:

MariaDB [cloud]> select account_name,state,removed from account ;
+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+
| account_name             | state   | removed             |
+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+
| system                   | enabled | NULL                |
| admin                    | enabled | NULL                |
| baremetal-system-account | enabled | NULL                |
| Removed-01               | removed | 2023-09-28 08:41:35 |
| Removed-02               | removed | 2023-09-28 08:45:18 |
| Removed-03               | removed | 2023-09-28 08:46:16 |
+--------------------------+---------+---------------------+
6 rows in set (0.001 sec)

MariaDB [cloud]>

[hsato03]

@soreana Thank's for testing.