Creating a product through the web interface creates a product with a schema mismatch

[andrewg-spectra]

Describe the bug
Creating a product through the web interface

creates a product with a schema mismatch

The server produces the following output:

codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-20 18:07] - [::ffff:192.168.22.114]:57194 -- [Anonymous] POST /v6.43/Products@addProduct
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-20 18:07] - User requested add product 'test'
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-20 18:07] - Disconnecting product 'test'
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-20 18:07] - [::ffff:192.168.22.114]:57196 -- [Anonymous] POST /v6.43/Products@getProducts

CodeChecker version
v6.17.0

To Reproduce
Create a codechecker-web server with a PostgreSQL database. I use something similar to this sample compose file.
Using the web interface create a new product (see image above).

Expected behaviour
I expect the new product to be created without a schema mismatch.

Desktop (please complete the following information)

• OS: Linux
• Browser:Chrome
• Version: 94.0.4606.81

Additional context
Using the command CodeChecker cmd products add test --url <server_url> will create a product without displaying the schema mismatch error.

[csordasmarton]

@andrewg-spectra By default in case of Sqlite if you start a CodeChecker server to an empty workspace directory (CodeChecker server -w ~/workspace/my_empty_dir) it will create a config database under this directory and also a separate database for the Default product:

• ~/workspace/my_empty_dir/config.sqlite
• ~/workspace/my_empty_dir/Default.sqlite

In case of PostgreSQL the default configuration database name is config (See: CodeChecker server --help):

  --dbname DBNAME, --db-name DBNAME
                        Name of the database to use. (default: config)

So I think you tried to create a product with a wrong and already existing database.

[andrewg-spectra]

@csordasmarton The UX here is confusing because "Database Name" on the web form or dbname/db-name in the CLI could be referring to:

• The product database (which should not exist yet), or
• The config database where a list of all the products are stored.

I think the correct answer is the latter. When I specify the name of a new database that does not exist, I get this error:

codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-26 16:56] - Server waiting for client requests on [[::]:8001]
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-26 16:56] - [::ffff:172.19.0.1]:55426 -- [Anonymous] POST /v6.43/Configuration@getNotificationBannerText
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-26 16:56] - [::ffff:172.19.0.1]:55428 -- [Anonymous] POST /v6.43/ServerInfo@getPackageVersion
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-26 16:56] - [::ffff:172.19.0.1]:55434 -- [Anonymous] POST /v6.43/Authentication@getAuthParameters
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-26 16:56] - [::ffff:172.19.0.1]:55436 -- [Anonymous] POST /v6.43/Authentication@hasPermission
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-26 16:56] - [::ffff:172.19.0.1]:55438 -- [Anonymous] POST /v6.43/Products@getProducts
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-26 16:56] - [::ffff:172.19.0.1]:55442 -- [Anonymous] POST /v6.43/Products@addProduct
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [INFO 2021-10-26 16:56] - User requested add product 'test'
codechecker-db-1           | 2021-10-26 16:56:53.454 UTC [43] FATAL:  database "test" does not exist
codechecker-codechecker-1  | [ERROR 2021-10-26 16:56] - The database for product 'test' cannot be connected to.

Honestly, as a user, I don't even want to be exposed to the db internals of CodeChecker. That's just my own personal thoughts though and not the issue I want to raise here. Overall I am very happy with CodeChecker have a workaround to this issue by using the CLI.

[detuur]

Correct UX would be catching that the user is trying to use the CodeChecker config database, and explaining that they need to make a separate database for every product that they're adding.

Even better UX would be to automatically create a database, instead of having the end-user do it first.