Bug 1357214 - [RFE] Chargeback of containers based on tags
Summary: [RFE] Chargeback of containers based on tags
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat CloudForms Management Engine
Classification: Red Hat
Component: Reporting
Version: 5.6.0
Hardware: Unspecified
OS: Unspecified
high
high
Target Milestone: GA
: 5.7.0
Assignee: Ari Zellner
QA Contact: Einat Pacifici
URL:
Whiteboard: container:chargeback
Depends On:
Blocks: 1361176
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2016-07-16 18:31 UTC by Jon Jozwiak
Modified: 2017-01-11 20:16 UTC (History)
10 users (show)

Fixed In Version: 5.7.0.0
Doc Type: If docs needed, set a value
Doc Text:
This release adds the ability to generate chargeback reports for containers based on tags assigned to projects. This feature update increases both relevance of tags applied to a specific time period of the project and cost accuracy.
Clone Of:
: 1361176 (view as bug list)
Environment:
Last Closed: 2017-01-11 20:16:18 UTC
Category: ---
Cloudforms Team: ---
Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)

Description Jon Jozwiak 2016-07-16 18:31:14 UTC
Description of problem:

Currently container chargeback can only be done based on project.  This RFE is requesting to add the ability to do chargeback reporting for containers based on tag.  

The use case from the customer is that they would like to show back costs to their internal businesses.  Each business will have 1 to many projects.  They will tag projects to the business unit they belong to.  Then would like to report a cost to the business unit based on all the projects they ran.  

Overall they would like to be able to charge back based on number and allocated sizes of pods by a customer for a given time interval.

Comment 4 Federico Simoncelli 2016-07-22 08:00:39 UTC
(In reply to Jon Jozwiak from comment #0)
> Overall they would like to be able to charge back based on number and
> allocated sizes of pods by a customer for a given time interval.

Jon can you clarify this requirement? What are the allocated sizes of a pod? Are you referring to the pod limitranges?

http://kubernetes.io/docs/admin/limitrange/

or the container limits/requests:

http://kubernetes.io/docs/user-guide/compute-resources/

or both?

If this part is less important we can tackle the rest and leave this to be analyzed in a second step.

Comment 5 Jon Jozwiak 2016-07-27 20:53:55 UTC
I followed up with the customer and it is actually chargeback by allocated size of a project.  They are using resource quotas as described here: 

https://docs.openshift.com/enterprise/3.1/dev_guide/quota.html

They will implement small, medium, and large quotas and then chargeback a different amount based on size of the project.

Comment 7 Federico Simoncelli 2016-08-02 16:22:02 UTC
(In reply to Jon Jozwiak from comment #5)
> I followed up with the customer and it is actually chargeback by allocated
> size of a project.  They are using resource quotas as described here: 
> 
> https://docs.openshift.com/enterprise/3.1/dev_guide/quota.html
> 
> They will implement small, medium, and large quotas and then chargeback a
> different amount based on size of the project.

Jon I split out this requirement to bug 1362615.

Comment 8 Federico Simoncelli 2016-08-29 13:58:05 UTC
Ari, I think we have PR for this right? Can you leave the link here?

Comment 9 Ari Zellner 2016-08-30 11:22:58 UTC
Upstream PR: https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/pull/10671

Comment 10 Ari Zellner 2016-09-01 14:28:39 UTC
Additional PR's that must go in:
https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/pull/10788
https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/pull/10784

Comment 11 Mooli Tayer 2016-09-04 09:05:09 UTC
This should be posted right?

Comment 13 Ari Zellner 2016-09-13 13:26:41 UTC
https://github.com/ManageIQ/manageiq/pull/11010 Fixes this feature for VMs
and its merged upstream

Comment 14 Einat Pacifici 2016-11-01 12:06:06 UTC
Verified. As per RFE: It is now possible to generate chargeback reports based on tags that are assigned to projects.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.