-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 898
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
Consider cloud volumes as data storages in chargeback #16638
Merged
gtanzillo
merged 5 commits into
ManageIQ:master
from
lpichler:consider_cloud_volumes_as_datastorages
Dec 12, 2017
Merged
Consider cloud volumes as data storages in chargeback #16638
gtanzillo
merged 5 commits into
ManageIQ:master
from
lpichler:consider_cloud_volumes_as_datastorages
Dec 12, 2017
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
tag_class is overwritten on ChargebackRate
lpichler
force-pushed
the
consider_cloud_volumes_as_datastorages
branch
from
December 12, 2017 07:44
3bb1a5c
to
2db33a4
Compare
Checked commits lpichler/manageiq@9da6220~...56edf32 with ruby 2.3.3, rubocop 0.47.1, haml-lint 0.20.0, and yamllint 1.10.0 |
lpichler
changed the title
[WIP] Consider cloud volumes as data storages in chargeback
Consider cloud volumes as data storages in chargeback
Dec 12, 2017
@miq-bot add_label gaprindashvili/yes, chargeback, bug @miq-bot assign @gtanzillo |
gtanzillo
approved these changes
Dec 12, 2017
simaishi
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 14, 2017
…astorages Consider cloud volumes as data storages in chargeback (cherry picked from commit 633283e) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526039
Gaprindashvili backport details:
|
@miq-bot add_label fine/yes |
simaishi
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 15, 2017
…astorages Consider cloud volumes as data storages in chargeback (cherry picked from commit 633283e) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526040
Fine backport details:
|
d-m-u
pushed a commit
to d-m-u/manageiq
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 6, 2018
…s_as_datastorages Consider cloud volumes as data storages in chargeback (cherry picked from commit 633283e) https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1526040
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
We can assign rate according to the tag of data storages of Vm:
What is data storages ?
for Infra: Vm#storage
for Cloud Vm#cloud_volumes
Variant 'for Cloud Vm#cloud_volumes' was missing and this PR is adding it.
Alternative
We can also add to the assignments option 'Tagged Cloud Volumes' but I think that this is beneficial, user can generate report for cloud and infra in one report.
Next?
Update in same way option 'Selected Datastores' and here cloud volumes as well.
Links
@miq-bot add_label gaprindashvili/yes, chargeback, bug
@miq-bot assign @gtanzillo