Skip to content
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

[EUWE] Prioritize rate with tag of VM when selecting from more rates #13556

Merged

Conversation

lpichler
Copy link
Contributor

backport of #12534 for euwe

@miq-bot add_label euwe/yes

cc @gtanzillo

@simaishi

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jan 18, 2017

This pull request is not mergeable. Please rebase and repush.

gtanzillo and others added 3 commits January 20, 2017 13:00
There is a case that more rates can be selected
(for example when storage have more tags)
and in this case, values are accumulated together in report.

so this first way how to deterministically select just one rate
of storage and compute.

So when more rates are selected then
rate with matching tag of VM is used.
@lpichler lpichler force-pushed the select_chargeback_rate_deterministically_1 branch from 107c6cf to f4acdb9 Compare January 20, 2017 12:02
@lpichler
Copy link
Contributor Author

@miq-bot
Copy link
Member

miq-bot commented Jan 20, 2017

Checked commits lpichler/manageiq@4254abe~...93d2241 with ruby 2.2.6, rubocop 0.46.0, and haml-lint 0.19.0
5 files checked, 0 offenses detected
Everything looks good. 👍

Copy link
Member

@gtanzillo gtanzillo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍 Looks good!

@simaishi simaishi merged commit d46af4e into ManageIQ:euwe Jan 24, 2017
@simaishi simaishi added this to the Sprint 53 Ending Jan 30, 2017 milestone Jan 24, 2017
@lpichler lpichler deleted the select_chargeback_rate_deterministically_1 branch January 24, 2017 14:52
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants