Red Hat Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
|Summary:||[RFE] Group definition groupBy pattern subMatch|
|Product:||[Other] RHQ Project||Reporter:||Jay Shaughnessy <jshaughn>|
|Component:||Inventory||Assignee:||Charles Crouch <ccrouch>|
|Status:||CLOSED WONTFIX||QA Contact:|
|Version:||unspecified||CC:||asantos, cwelton, hbrock|
|Target Milestone:||---||Keywords:||FutureFeature, Improvement, SubFeature|
|Fixed In Version:||Doc Type:||Enhancement|
|Doc Text:||Story Points:||---|
|Last Closed:||2014-05-15 16:18:08 EDT||Type:||---|
|oVirt Team:||---||RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:|
|Bug Depends On:|
|Bug Blocks:||536002, 678340|
Description Jay Shaughnessy 2008-07-16 15:35:00 EDT
This feature would allow group definitions to pivot on a value substring specified as a regex submatch. The basic idea is to be able to pivot on information embedded within values such as hostname, ip, etc. For example, if business unit is encoded into hostnames at company X and they want to see all JBAS servers by business unit this currently can't be done with a single group definition. IT can be done with one GD per business unit, with each GD narrowing it's resulting single group with a "contains" type operation. For example, if we had two business units each with two machines: BU01-Machine01 BU01-Machine02 BU02-Machine01 BU02-Machine01 today: resource.type.plugin = JBossAS resource.type.name = JBossAS Server resource.parent.type.plugin = Platforms resource.parent.type.category = PLATFORM resource.parent.trait[Hostname] contains = BU01 resource.type.plugin = JBossAS resource.type.name = JBossAS Server resource.parent.type.plugin = Platforms resource.parent.type.category = PLATFORM resource.parent.trait[Hostname] contains = BU02 The proposal is for something like: resource.type.plugin = JBossAS resource.type.name = JBossAS Server resource.parent.type.plugin = Platforms resource.parent.type.category = PLATFORM groupby resource.parent.trait[Hostname] matching (BU\d\d)-Machine\d\d So, the group by would work not just on distinct values of a specified value set, but distinct portions of those values.
Comment 1 Joseph Marques 2008-09-10 09:47:52 EDT
jay, i believe this functionality already exists. though, it's perfectly possible that it did not when you filed this jira. i tested some of your scenarios, and they work just fine without error. can you test some more permutations and then either re-open or close as appropriate?
Comment 2 Joseph Marques 2008-09-10 09:50:36 EDT
oph, nevermind. i used your first two examples. this jira is really a proposition for the one at the bottom.