Bug 1214143

Summary:	[RFE] capture "actual disk" usage info of rhev thin provision disks
Product:	Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine	Reporter:	Prasad Mukhedkar <pmukhedk>
Component:	Providers	Assignee:	Moti Asayag <masayag>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Dave Johnson <dajohnso>
Severity:	urgent	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	5.3.0	CC:	gblomqui, jfrey, jhardy, obarenbo, oourfali, pmukhedk
Target Milestone:	GA	Keywords:	FutureFeature
Target Release:	5.6.0
Hardware:	x86_64
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:	rhev
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Enhancement
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2016-05-13 13:10:19 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Prasad Mukhedkar 2015-04-22 05:58:04 UTC

Description of problem:

In rhev, "Thin Provisioned" disks consist two sizes
actual size and virtual size. cloudforms only collect
virtual size. 

knowing "actual size" of virtual disks is very important
to plan capacity planning. please have enhancement in the
product to collect "actual size" of vdisks. 


Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
5.3.0.15

Comment 3 Joe Vlcek 2015-07-27 18:45:14 UTC

I have compared how VMWare and RHEVm report thin provisioned disk usage for VMs and
they seem to be the same.

Is there a bug in RHEVm or is this an RFE.

If this is a bug please provide a description of the steps necessary to reproduce it.

Thank you,
JoeV

Comment 4 Joe Vlcek 2015-08-03 14:28:34 UTC

The current functionality seems to work as designed, so I am marking this as an RFE. If it is felt his is actually a bug please remove the [RFE] from the the topic and provide a detailed description of the steps to reproduce it.

Thank you,
JoeV

Comment 5 Prasad Mukhedkar 2015-09-28 05:49:00 UTC

JoeV thank you for looking into this. I agree to consider this as a RFE.

Comment 9 Moti Asayag 2016-05-09 13:57:10 UTC

Oved, Greg, 

Isn't this bug a duplicate of bug 1309275 which was already fixed ?

Comment 10 Oved Ourfali 2016-05-10 05:45:20 UTC

Prasad, those indeed seem duplicates. I see you've opened both of them.
Are they duplicates, or are we missing something?