Fix Usage job not executing successfully

[winterhazel]

Description

The Usage job does not execute successfully in 4.20.1 because cloud_usage.account is missing the column api_key_access (introduced in #9741). This PR fixes the issue.

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. Before the changes, I tried to execute the Usage job. However, I got an exception and no usage records were generated

2025-01-26 00:13:58,470 INFO  [cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_bc7085c8] (Usage-Job-1:[]) (logid:) Parsing usage records between [2024-11-27T11:50:00+0000] and [2025-01-26T00:12:59+0000].
2025-01-26 00:13:58,838 ERROR [user.dao.AccountDaoImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_90169b7f] (Usage-Job-1:[]) (logid:) DB Exception on: HikariProxyPreparedStatement@1912723807 wrapping com.mysql.cj.jdbc.ClientPreparedStatement: SELECT account.id, account.account_name, account.type, account.role_id, account.domain_id, account.state, account.created, account.removed, account.cleanup_needed, account.network_domain, account.uuid, account.default_zone_id, account.default, account.api_key_access FROM account WHERE account.id = 1 java.sql.SQLSyntaxErrorException: Unknown column 'account.api_key_access' in 'field list'
	at com.mysql.cj.jdbc.exceptions.SQLError.createSQLException(SQLError.java:121)
	at com.mysql.cj.jdbc.exceptions.SQLExceptionsMapping.translateException(SQLExceptionsMapping.java:122)
	at com.mysql.cj.jdbc.ClientPreparedStatement.executeInternal(ClientPreparedStatement.java:916)
	at com.mysql.cj.jdbc.ClientPreparedStatement.executeQuery(ClientPreparedStatement.java:972)
	at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.ProxyPreparedStatement.executeQuery(ProxyPreparedStatement.java:52)
	at com.zaxxer.hikari.pool.HikariProxyPreparedStatement.executeQuery(HikariProxyPreparedStatement.java)
	at com.cloud.utils.db.GenericDaoBase.findById(GenericDaoBase.java:1074)
	at com.cloud.user.dao.AccountDaoImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_90169b7f.CGLIB$findById$48(<generated>)
	at com.cloud.user.dao.AccountDaoImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_90169b7f_FastClassByCloudStack_ef992de4.invoke(<generated>)
	at net.sf.cglib.proxy.MethodProxy.invokeSuper(MethodProxy.java:228)
	at com.cloud.utils.component.ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor$InterceptorDispatcher.intercept(ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor.java:123)
	at com.cloud.user.dao.AccountDaoImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_90169b7f.findById(<generated>)
	at com.cloud.utils.db.GenericDaoBase.findByIdIncludingRemoved(GenericDaoBase.java:1029)
	at com.cloud.user.dao.AccountDaoImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_90169b7f.CGLIB$findByIdIncludingRemoved$99(<generated>)
	at com.cloud.user.dao.AccountDaoImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_90169b7f_FastClassByCloudStack_ef992de4.invoke(<generated>)
	at net.sf.cglib.proxy.MethodProxy.invokeSuper(MethodProxy.java:228)
	at com.cloud.utils.component.ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor$InterceptorDispatcher.intercept(ComponentInstantiationPostProcessor.java:123)
	at com.cloud.user.dao.AccountDaoImpl_EnhancerByCloudStack_90169b7f.findByIdIncludingRemoved(<generated>)
	at com.cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl.handleNetworkEvent(UsageManagerImpl.java:2152)
	at com.cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl.createHelperRecord(UsageManagerImpl.java:1100)
	at com.cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl.parse(UsageManagerImpl.java:726)
	at com.cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl.runInContextInternal(UsageManagerImpl.java:442)
	at com.cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl$1.runInContext(UsageManagerImpl.java:379)
	at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable$1.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:49)
	at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext$1.call(DefaultManagedContext.java:56)
	at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.callWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:103)
	at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.impl.DefaultManagedContext.runWithContext(DefaultManagedContext.java:53)
	at org.apache.cloudstack.managed.context.ManagedContextRunnable.run(ManagedContextRunnable.java:46)
	at com.cloud.usage.UsageManagerImpl.run(UsageManagerImpl.java:381)
	at java.base/java.util.concurrent.Executors$RunnableAdapter.call(Executors.java:539)
	at java.base/java.util.concurrent.FutureTask.run(FutureTask.java:264)
	at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor$ScheduledFutureTask.run(ScheduledThreadPoolExecutor.java:304)
	at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1136)
	at java.base/java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:635)
	at java.base/java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:840)

2. I executed the query manually and tried to execute the Usage job. This time, it finished successfully

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 16.14%. Comparing base (bf1ff10) to head (dc113ed).
Report is 29 commits behind head on 4.20.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               4.20   #10244   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     16.13%   16.14%           
- Complexity    12966    12973    +7     
=========================================
  Files          5639     5639           
  Lines        494251   494297   +46     
  Branches      59899    59908    +9     
=========================================
+ Hits          79766    79788   +22     
- Misses       405664   405684   +20     
- Partials       8821     8825    +4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	4.02% <ø> (ø)
unittests	16.99% <ø> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

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.

[weizhouapache]

code lgtm

[harikrishna-patnala]

LGTM

[DaanHoogland]

@winterhazel , can you confirm this is not a problem in older versions?

[weizhouapache]

#9741 was introduced in 4.20.1

[lucas-a-martins]

LGTM

Thank you for the PR. I'm working on a Usage related PR and this bug is blocking my progression.

I tested the proposed fix in my local environment and the Usage job executed successfully.