c2c-oerpscenario team mailing list archive

[Raphaël Valyi - http://www.akretion.com <620714@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

** Changed in: openobject-server
       Status: In Progress => Fix Released

-- 
[6.0] osv.memory objects may be created with wrong field values for dynamic fields in some cases
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/620714
You received this bug notification because you are a member of C2C
OERPScenario, which is subscribed to the OpenERP Project Group.

Status in OpenObject Server: Fix Released

Bug description:
Hello,

this is on trunk server rev #2635 using addons rev #4734

osv.memory objects are not properly written from the client into the memory and are also wrongly read if there are several instancse of the same osv.memory class. This is very annoying as it lead to totally wrong behavior when doing twice the same action in the same server session for instance.

A simple way to reproduce the bug is with the sale and stock module + demo data.

1) create a new sale order, add one product line with say product "ATX" and 12 items, validate  the order.
2) go to the related expedition picking and force the expedition.
3) click on the right side "return picking" of the expedition picking to return products.
Just specify you want to return 1 product only.
Check that you have a return with only 1 product, the first time it works fine.

Do the exact same process again without restarting the server. Yes, your return picking will now have 12 products, not just 1 and you'll also get a strange popup after you do the picking.


What is happening? 
To discover I instrumented a bit stock/wizard/stock/wizard/stock_return_picking.py and enabled the GTK client XML/RPC logs.
Here is my instrumentation patch:
=== modified file 'stock/wizard/stock_return_picking.py'
--- stock/wizard/stock_return_picking.py	2010-08-10 12:28:52 +0000
+++ stock/wizard/stock_return_picking.py	2010-08-19 20:54:38 +0000
@@ -148,6 +148,11 @@
         date_cur = time.strftime('%Y-%m-%d %H:%M:%S')
     
         move_ids = [m.id for m in [line for line in pick.move_lines]]
+        print "self", self
+        print "ids", ids
+        print "picking", pick.id, pick.name
+        print "move_ids", move_ids
+        print "self.read(cr, uid, ids[0])", data
         set_invoice_state_to_none = True
         for move in move_obj.browse(cr, uid, move_ids):
             if not new_picking:


Now let's run the described scenario again while looking the logs:

===== 1st iteration:
client-side XML/RPC:
DEBUG_RPC:rpc.request:('execute', 'consig', 1, 'admin', ('stock.return.picking', 'create', {'return133': 1.0, 'invoice_state': 'none'}, {'lang': u'en_US', 'search_default_available': 1, 'tz': False, 'active_model': u'stock.picking', 'contact_display': 'partner', 'active_ids': [94], 'active_id': 94}))
...

server side:
self <stock.wizard.stock_return_picking.stock_return_picking object at 0x30dda10>
ids [1]
picking 94 OUT/00032
move_ids [133]
self.read(cr, uid, ids[0]) {'return133': 1.0, 'id': 1, 'invoice_state': 'none'}



===== 2nd iteration:
client-side XML/RPC:
DEBUG_RPC:rpc.request:('execute', 'consig', 1, 'admin', ('stock.return.picking', 'create', {'return135': 1.0, 'invoice_state': 'none'}, {'lang': u'en_US', 'search_default_available': 1, 'tz': False, 'active_model': u'stock.picking', 'contact_display': 'partner', 'active_ids': [96], 'active_id': 96}))
...

server side:
self <stock.wizard.stock_return_picking.stock_return_picking object at 0x30dda10>
ids [2]
picking 96 OUT/00033
move_ids [135]
self.read(cr, uid, ids[0]) {'return133': False, 'invoice_state': 'none', 'id': 2, 'return135': 12.0}


So as you see, my second picking id 96 has only one move id 135. In the GTK clients things are all right.
But, when doing a self.read(cr, uid, [2]), the server read get totally wrong values: it remembers the 'return133' param while it's False now, and 'return135' is left to 12.0 while it is supposed to be assigned at 1.0, just like in the previous case.

So it looks like create/write/read behave wrongly when there are several instance of an osv_memory. This leads to critical bugs as you can't do a return here for instance!

Hope this helps, again this is critical.