This is what I have:
Crowd which is using LDAP for authentication. It has Jira setup as an application.
Jira application which has two directories: an internal one and an Atlassian Crowd. Atlassian Crowd directory is linked to Crowd.
Now this is where I get confused:
In Jira I click on User Directories and see that JIRA Internal Directory is the first one in order.
I click on Groups, filter them by "JIRA" and see five group (jira-administrators, jira-developers, jira-servicedesk-users, jira-system-administrators, jira-users). Each group has a certain number of users in it.
Then I switch the order of directories and have Atlassian Crowd to be the first one. I click on Groups, filter them by "JIRA" and see the same five groups as in the JIRA Internal Directory. The number of users and users themselves are different though from the ones in JIRA Internal Directory.
I am confused as the only group that is setup in Crowd is crowd-administrators.
Can someone explain to me where does this information come from please?
Since you mentioned that the apparent group memberships change when you change the order of directories in JIRA, I would say this is very likely due to the membership aggregation semantics in JIRA/Crowd.
Internally, JIRA uses libraries provided by Crowd to connect to Crowd, and until Crowd 2.8, Crowd (and hence JIRA) had some inconsistencies in how it answers queries of "is user A a member of Group X?" vs "does group X have user A as a member?".
The complexity there arises from the fact that user A can be a member of group X in directory 1, but not in directory 2 (or vice versa); furthermore, user A could exist in directory 1 but not in directory 2 (or vice versa); or group X could exist in directory 1 but not in 2 (or vice versa).
So prior to Crowd 2.8, for performance reasons, Crowd would answer the questions from the second paragraph differently for the same scenarios in certain cases (i.e. "is user a member of the group" gave a different answer to "does group have this user as a member").
The exact behaviour for this has been clarified in Crowd 2.8 (as long as you don't use nested groups - it's by allowing users of Crowd to choose between 2 semantics, "aggregating" or "non-aggregating", which you can read about here. When JIRA upgraded to a version of the Crowd libraries which use Crowd 2.8, they picked one these 2 behaviours on behalf of their users, but unfortunately I cannot remember which one they picked (it was a year or two ago).
The simplest advice (from my perspective) that comes out of this is:
If that doesn't work or you want more information (I don't blame you - it's stupidly complicated!), please raise a support ticket with your JIRA and Crowd versions.
(source: I'm a former Crowd developer.)
If you spend enough time as a Jira admin - whether you are managing a single, mid-sized instance, a large enterprise one or juggling multiple instances at once - you will eventually find yourself in ...
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!Find a group
Connect with like-minded Atlassian users at free events near you!
Unfortunately there are no AUG chapters near you at the moment.Start an AUG
We're bringing product updates and pro tips on teamwork to ten cities around the world.Save your spot