Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Bug] Deleting an order deletes a random existing VM #11

Open
evrifaessa opened this issue Nov 6, 2022 · 1 comment
Open

[Bug] Deleting an order deletes a random existing VM #11

evrifaessa opened this issue Nov 6, 2022 · 1 comment
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working

Comments

@evrifaessa
Copy link
Member

Describe the bug
When the Proxmox module is set up and it fails setting up an order for some reason, deleting that order results in an unrelated VM being randomly deleted.

A possible reason I could think of is the Proxmox module trying to start VMs with IDs beginning with 101 and increasing. When that order fails for some reason and you try to delete the order, it deletes what it thinks to be the VM from that order. So it attempts to delete VM 101.

However, VM 101 is a previously created, completely unrelated VM. Now it completely removed VM 101 instead of whatever it tried to create and failed.

To Reproduce
Steps to reproduce the behavior:

  1. Have existing VMs in your Proxmox server
  2. Create an order and try getting it to fail (I don't know how)
  3. Try deleting that order
  4. Now see if it deletes an existing, unrelated VM

Expected behavior
It absolutely should not delete an unrelated VM. We need to make sure that VM is created using FOSSBilling and tied to that specific order. VM IDs should also not interfere with existing VMs.

@evrifaessa evrifaessa added the bug Something isn't working label Nov 6, 2022
@Anuril Anuril moved this to 0.1.0 in Proxmox Module Roadmap Sep 20, 2023
@Anuril
Copy link
Collaborator

Anuril commented Sep 20, 2023

This is part of a larger issue with VM IDs. This has been rewritten completely, and it's not possible to happen anymore, as VM-IDs now consist of the users id, the order id and a random four-digit number.

@Anuril Anuril self-assigned this Sep 20, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working
Projects
Status: 0.1.0
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants