Bug 1646562

Summary:	Bad field name format for chargeback rates
Product:	Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine	Reporter:	Tasos Papaioannou <tpapaioa>
Component:	Reporting	Assignee:	Libor Pichler <lpichler>
Status:	CLOSED ERRATA	QA Contact:	juwatts
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	5.10.0	CC:	dmetzger, juwatts, obarenbo, simaishi, smallamp, yrudman
Target Milestone:	GA
Target Release:	5.11.0
Hardware:	All
OS:	All
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:	5.11.0.1	Doc Type:	If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2019-12-12 13:34:23 UTC	Type:	Bug
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	CFME Core	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Tasos Papaioannou 2018-11-05 16:33:13 UTC

Description of problem:

In 5.10.0, new chargeback report fields were added:

Cpu Allocated Rate
Cpu Used Rate
Disk Io Used Rate
Net Io Used Rate

The formats of these names are inconsistent with the existing fields, and should be:

CPU Allocated Rate
CPU Used Rate
Disk I/O Used Rate
Network I/O Used Rate


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

5.10.0.22

How reproducible:

100%

Steps to Reproduce:
1.) Create or edit a report based on 'Chargeback for Vms' and view the Available Fields dropdown.

Actual results:

See above.

Expected results:

See above.

Additional info:

Comment 3 juwatts 2019-07-02 15:58:41 UTC

Verified in  5.11.0.11.20190625161125_392c61e

The following are now available fields:
vCPUs Allocated Rate
CPU Used Rate
Disk I/O Used
Network I/O Used Rate

Comment 5 errata-xmlrpc 2019-12-12 13:34:23 UTC

Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2019:4199